-g^SSvoTpffiivcf^ 


0  0G;C/:.._  srtt-'* 


BR  325  ,B6313  1916 

Boehmer,  Heinrich, 

1869- 

1927. 

Luther  in  light  of 

recent 

■r  <a  c  £i  a  r- r- V» 

Xutber  in  Xigbtot 
IRecent  IReeearcb 


BY 

HEINRIGH  BOHMER 

Marburg  University 

TRANSLATED  BY 

CARL  F.  HUTH,  Jr. 

University  of  Chicago 


1916 

THE  CHRISTIAN  HERALD 
NEW  YORK 


Copyright  1916 
By  The  Christian  Herald 


FOREWORD. 

By  Prof.  James  Harvey  Robinson, 
Columbia  University. 

T  T  is  a  great  pleasure  to  introduce  this  book  to  the 
■*■  intelhgent  American  reader.  Everyone  who  has 
even  a  modicum  of  historical  interest  finds  his  cm*iosity 
aroused  by  Luther,  and  welcomes  more  information 
in  regard  to  this  German  national  hero  whose  influ- 
ence has  spread  so  far  beyond  the  bounds  of  his  own 
land.  We  may  be  attracted  or  repelled  by  what  wc 
know  of  his  teachings  and  personality,  but  he  can 
hardly  leave  anyone  indifferent  and  neutral.  Thft 
volume  of  which  this  is  a  translation  appears  in  one  of 
those  excellent  series  designed  for  the  cultivated  Ger- 
man public,  similar  to  our  "Home  University 
Library."  The  author  seems  to  me  particularly  well 
qualified  by  knowledge,  temperament  and  style  to 
give  us  a  fresh  and  stimulating  conception  of  Luther. 
He  is  broadly  sympathetic  but  no  hero  worshiper. 
There  is  no  trace  of  religious  partisanship  in  him.  He 
feels  that  he  can  afford  to  tell  all  the  varied  truth 
without  suppression  or  distortion.  He  is  well  aware 
of  the  widely  divergent  judgments  that  have  been 
passed  upon  Luther  by  Protestant,  Catholic  and  so- 
called  "rationaMstic"  writers  during  the  four  cen- 
turies which  have  elapsed  since  Luther  began  to  criti- 


cize  the  existing  order,  and  no  small  part  of  the  in- 
terest of  his  book  lies  in  the  dexterous  manner  in  which 
he  gives  the  reader  an  idea  of  the  conflicting  interpre- 
tations which  have  been  placed  upon  the  Reformer's 
deeds  and  sayings.  His  consistent  aim  is  to  place 
liimself  in  the  milieu  in  which  Luther  lived  and 
worked.  He  judges  him  not  from  the  standpoint  of 
to-day  but  from  that  of  the  first  half  of  the  sixteenth 
century.  He  is  critical  without  any  tendency  to  lapse 
into  mere  negativity.  To  him  and  his  readers  Luther 
is  always  the  livest  man  possible.  His  style  is  clear 
and  cogent,  with  a  certain  familiar  homeliness,  sug- 
gesting that  of  Luther  himself.  No  matter  how  wide 
or  how  narrow  has  been  one's  reading  in  regard  to 
Luther,  Professor  Bohmer  will  give  the  reader  new 
facts,  new  judgments  and  new  points  of  view.  He  is 
able  to  take  the  beginner  in  hand  and  at  the  same  time 
to  instruct  the  historical  student  who  may  think  that 
he  already  knows  as  much  about  Luther  as  he  cares  to. 
Professor  Huth's  translation  seems  to  me  not  only 
correct  and  intelligent,  but  it  reproduces  with  skill 
the  spirit  of  the  original  style.  If  he  now  and  then 
permits  the  German  idiom  to  show  through,  that  will 
not  disturb  the  reader  but  will  serve  rather  to 
strengthen  his  confidence  in  the  fidelity  of  the  ren- 
dermg.  James  Harvey  Robinson. 


u 


CHAPTER  I. 

The  Old  Portrait  of  Luther  and  the  Development  of 
Research  on  Luther. 

Open  your  eyes  and  see  me  as  I  am. — Dantb. 

"\/f  ARTIN  LUTHER  voluntarily  sat  for  a  por- 
"*•  trait  perhaps  only  once  in  his  life — at  the  time 

of  his  wedding.  Nevertheless,  even  to-day  every  half- 
way educated  person  is  quite  familiar  with  his  fea- 
tures. In  Germany  the  school  children  know  his  face 
so  well  that  they  can  point  to  it  without  difficulty  in 
paintings  representing  many  characters.  Indeed, 
little  girls  need  sometimes  only  to  determine  with  a 
rapid  glance  "what  the  man  in  the  picture  is  wearing" 
to  know :  that  is  Doctor  Luther.  This  knowledge  and 
acuteness,  especially  on  the  part  of  the  female  portion 
of  our  offspring,  certainly  is  quite  pleasing,  though 
it  surely  is  partially  due  to  the  fact  that  the  pictures  of 
the  Reformer  which  they  see  in  school  and  at  home 
are  all  so  much  alike.  Almost  every  one  of  them 
shows  a  man  in  the  portliness  of  advanced  years,  with 
a  broad  peasant  countenance,  unusually  well  devel- 
oped  jaws,  peculiarly  full  brown,  curly  hair,  small 
gentle  eyes  and  on  the  whole  rather  pudgy  features. 
But  is  the  Luther  of  these  pictures  really  the 
Reformer  Luther?  Without  doubt  it  is  the  Luther 
one  expects  to  see  in  approaching  a  monument  or 
portrait  of  him,  the  Luther  whom  Rietschel  after  some 
hesitation  chose  as  model  when  he  created  his  famous 
statue,  though  he  knew  very  well  that  the  real  Luther 
1 


2      LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

in  1521  looked  very  different.  It  is  the  Luther  whom 
even  the  most  extravagantly  modern  artists  with 
astonishing  consistency  ever  again  portray,  and  from 
whose  skull  formation  physiognomists  and  race  theo- 
rists readily  and  unconcernedly,  as  is  the  custom  in 
their  blythe  science,  have  so  often  proven  that  the 
Reformer  had  Slavic  blood  in  his  veins.  For  did  not 
this  Luther  have  a  round  skull,  and  whoever  has  a 
round  skull  is  at  least  one  half  Slav,  even  though,  as 
in  this  case,  German  peasants  were  his  ancestors, 
and  the  Reformer  hailed  from  a  region  in  which 
hitherto  no  trace  of  Slavic  settlements  or  admixture 
of  Slavic  blood  has  been  found. 

This  Luther  therefore  undoubtedly  is  a  type, 
namely,  a  figure,  the  features  of  which  have  become 
us  fixed  to  the  artists  and  their  public  as  for  instance 
those  of  the  "Germania,"  the  "Helvetia"  and  other 
allegoric  females.  However,  though  this  Luther  is 
a  type,  he  certainly  is  not  a  freely  invented  wholly 
unhistoric  one  like  the  Apostle  Peter  or  the  Charle- 
magne of  mediaeval  art,  but  the  idealized  reproduc- 
tion of  an  historical  portrait  like  the  ''Old  Fritz"  of 
Menzel  and  the  "Queen  Louise"  of  Ranch.  Every- 
body knows  that  in  the  last  analysis  this  conventional 
representation  is  based  on  the  well-nigh  innumerable 
portraits  of  the  Reformer  by  the  great  master  Lucas 
Cranach,  and  that  it  is  found  in  a  truly  classic  example 
in  the  most  famous  painting  by  tliis  artist,  the  altar 
picture  in  the  city  church  at  Weimar.  "WTio  has  not 
repeatedly  even  in  quite  modern  "highly  scientific 
works"  about  Cranach  and  about  Luther  read  this  in 


DEVELOPMENT  OF  RESEARCH  3 

black  and  white?    In  fact  this  still  is  the  prevailing 
opinion  of  to-day. 

However,  what  "everybody"  believes  to  be  true 
usually  is  not  true.  If  under  an  expert  guidance  we 
submit  the  artistic  legacy  of  the  elder  Cranach  to  an 
unprejudiced  investigation  we  experience  one  sur- 
prise after  the  other  and  meet  with  disappointment 
upon  disappointment.  We  note  in  the  first  place  with 
considerable  misgiving  that  despite  decades  of  study 
of  the  history  of  art  this  legacy  has  not  yet  been  care- 
fully sifted.  In  the  second  place,  we  notice  that  so 
far  only  four  portraits  of  Luther,  two  paintings  in  oil 
and  two  copper  etchings,  have  been  proven  to  be  indu- 
bitably genuine  works  of  Cranach.  Lastly,  we  find 
that  the  classic  representation  of  the  type,  the  picture 
in  the  altar  at  Weimar,  was  not  created  by  the  elder 
Cranach,  but  evidently  was  made  two  years  after 
Cranach's  and  fully  nine  years  after  Luther's  death 
by  Lucas  Cranach  the  Younger.* 

*The  four  genuine  portraits  are:  Luther  as  monk,  front  view, 
copper  etching  of  1520;  Luther  as  monk,  in  profile,  copper  etching 
of  1521.  Luther  as  Squire  George,  oil  painting,  done  in  December. 
1521,  poorly  preserved,  now  in  the  City  Library  at  Leipzig;  oil 
painting,  front  view,  of  1526,  in  the  Kaufmann  Gallery  at  Berlin. 
To  these  possibly  may  be  added  the  small,  very  poorly  preserred 
round  portrait  in  the  Luther  Hall  at  Wittenberg,  and  an  oil  painting 
discovered  only  this  year  (1913)  by  Hans  von  Cranach,  Head  Cas- 
tellan of  the  Wartburg,  about  which  discussion  is  not  closed  as  yet. 
This  latter  painting  represents  the  aged,  gray-haired  Luther, 
though  minus  the  big  wart  which  is  visible  in  the  Epitaphium.  It 
is  the  prototype  of  many  modern  portraits.  Excellent  reproduc- 
tions may  be  had  directly  from  Herr  von  Cranach.  Compare  also 
Eduard  Flechsig:  Cranachstudien,  vol.  1,  1897,  pp.  257  ff ;  Cranach- 
werk  of  the  Saxon  Historical  Commission,  plates  74,  84,  85;  Hans 
Preuss:  Lutherbildnisse,  pp.  27,  30,  32,  34,  35,  and  ibid.,  a  tracing 
very  probably  executed  by  Hans  Cranach  after  which  portraits  of 
Luther  were  manufactured  in  the  atelier  of  the  Cranachs.  On  page 
40  is  a  reproduction  of  the  Epitaphium;  on  page  42  the  Weimar 
altar  painting. 


4      LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

Now,  if  we  examine  the  few  admittedly  genuine 
Cranachs  we  notice  further  that  the  typical  Luther 
head  certainly  does  not  go  back  to  these,  but  rather  to 
some  later  works  from  the  workshop  of  the  Cranachs 
about  the  origin  of  which  the  final  word  has  not  yet 
been  spoken.  The  most  important  of  these  are  the 
so-called  Epitaphium,  a  woodcut  with  a  lament  on 
Luther's  death,  and  a  recently  discovered  beautifully 
preserved  oil  painting.  The  "type"  in  the  former 
still  makes  quite  a  different  impression  from  that  in 
the  altar  painting  at  Weimar,  or  even  in  the  well- 
known  likenesses  by  Schwerdgeburth,  Gustav  Koenig, 
Ludwig  Richter  and  Spangenberg.  The  features  are 
much  sharper  and  more  energetic,  the  mouth  is  firmly 
closed.  On  the  forehead  the  hair  forms  a  loose  curl 
(cowlick),  a  furrow  of  anger  appears  between  the 
brows  and  above  the  right  eye  a  tremendous  wart 
glowers. 

It  is  impossible  for  us  now  to  determine  whether 
this  really  is  the  true  face  of  Doctor  Martin.  On  the 
other  hand,  we  can  say  with  assurance  that  not  one  of 
the  undoubtedly  genuine  portraits  by  the  elder  Cran- 
ach  wholly  agrees  with  the  descriptions  of  Luther's 
face  and  figure  which  have  been  handed  down  to  us 
by  Mosellan,  Kessler,  Melanchthon  and  other  contem- 
poraries. None  shows  the  peculiar  erect  bearing, 
bordering  on  stiffness — "so  that  he  seemed  rather 
to  be  bending  backward  than  forward" — none  even 
remotely  conveys  an  idea  of  the  expression  in  the 
dark  demoniac  eyes,  "which  sparkle  and  twinkle 
like    a    star,    so    that    one    cannot    well    bear    their 


DEVELOPMENT  OF  RESEARCH  5 

gaze."  These  falcon's  eyes,  lion's  eyes,  basilisk's 
eyes,  which  immediately  drew  the  attention  of 
everyone,  and  this  highly  characteristic  and  impos- 
ing heroic  presence  are  left  to  the  imagination 
even  in  these  portraits.  Unfortunately  imagination 
never  quite  makes  up  for  the  missing  concrete  repre- 
sentation. No  matter,  therefore,  how  well  drawn  even 
these  genuine  Cranachs  may  be,  they  are  certainly  not 
successful  portraits.  Nevertheless,  the  elder  Cranach 
was  by  far  the  ablest  of  the  few  artists  who  personally 
met  Luther.  The  younger  Lucas  possessed  much  less 
ability,  though  after  all  a  good  deal  more  than  the 
painter  of  the  well-known  picture  representing 
"Luther  on  the  Deathbed,"  now  in  the  Dresden  gal- 
lery, the  false  perspective  and  bungling  execution  of 
which  immediately  disturbs  even  a  layman,  or  the 
anonymous  artist  in  wax  who  created  the  famous 
death  mask  in  the  Library  of  St.  Mary  in  Halle.* 

The  really  great  German  portrait  artists  of  the 
sixteenth  century,  Diirer,  Holbein  and  Amberger, 
to  whom  we  owe  so  many  portraits  of  famous  contem- 
poraries, unhappily  never  had  an  opportunity  to  see 
the  most  renowned  of  all,  Doctor  Martin.  True, 
Diirer  had  the  sincere  intention  "in  everlasting  mem- 
ory to  portray  and  make  an  etching  in  copper  of  the 
God-inspired  man  who  had  helped  him  out  of  great 


*This  mask  is  frequently  regarded  as  the  most  faithful  repre- 
sentation of  Luther's  features.  It  was,  however,  taken  four  days 
after  Luther's  death,  at  a  time  when  decomposition  had  al- 
ready set  in.  Luther  succumbed  to  a  stroke  of  paralysis,  and  in 
such  cases  deterioration  is  very  rapid.  Besides,  the  mask  was 
damaged  in  the  course  of  time  and  has  evidently  been  patched  con- 
siderably about  the  mouth  and  nose. 


6      LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

tribulations,"  but  unfortunately  he  also  never  came 
to  Saxony.  The  extent  of  our  loss,  owing  to  the  fact 
that  these  great  artists  did  not  have  a  chance  to  por- 
tray Luther,  may  in  a  measure  be  judged  from  a  com- 
parison of  the  portraits  of  Melanchthon  from  the 
atelier  of  the  Cranachs  with  the  well-known  copper 
etching  by  Diirer  and  the  red  pencil  drawing  by 
Holbein  in  Windsor.  In  the  former  Magister  Philipp 
always  appears  so  starved,  miserable  and  wretched 
that  one's  heart  almost  aches  at  the  sight.  Even  in 
the  best  picture,  that  at  the  Wartburg,  he  utterly  fails 
to  impress  us  as  a  great  man.  Diirer  and  Holbein, 
on  the  contrary,  make  it  immediately  evident  that  the 
Preceptor  Germaniae  was  an  unusually  learned  and 
bright  person,  so  much  better  were  these  great  artists 
able  to  reproduce  the  spiritual  expression  in  a  face. 
Hence  we  must  familiarize  ourselves  with  the  idea 
that  we  possess  not  many  but  very  few  portraits  of 
Luther  from  the  hand  of  the  elder  Cranach  and  that 
among  these  few,  though  they  are  mostly  excellent  in 
technique,  there  is  not  a  single  good  likeness.  In  other 
words,  we  must  confess  that  we  do  not  any  more  ex- 
actly know  how  Luther  looked.  Nevertheless,  we  will 
do  well  henceforth  to  picture  him  to  ourselves  only 
as  he  is  depicted  in  those  few  unquestionably  genuine 
Cranachs  from  the  second  decade  of  the  sixteenth 
century.  If,  besides,  we  desire  to  have  before  our  eyes 
also  the  aging  Luther  we  may  add  to  these  the  recently 
discovered  oil  painting  and  the  Epitaphium  of  1546. 
But  we  will  for  all  time  strike  from  our  memory  the 
affable  and  corpulent  gentleman  of  fifty  with  immacu- 


DEVELOPMENT  OF  EESEARCH  7 

lately  groomed  hair  who  was  gradually  made  up  by 
idealization  from  the  type  furnished  by  artists  who 
were  more  well-meaning  than  expert.  We  will 
also  consign  to  oblivion  the  new,  so-called  historic 
Luther  whom  Hans  Fechner  produced  in  1905  by 
combining  several  portraits  by  Cranach.  (Helio- 
gravure published  by  Stalling  in  Oldenburg.) 

After  all,  what  difference  does  it  make  if  we  no 
more  know  and  probably  never  will  know  exactly 
how  Luther  looked,  if  only  we  know  precisely 
what  he  did,  was,  thought  and  wished  to  achieve? 
This  indeed  is  vastly  more  important.  However, 
it  is  not  by  any  chance  an  easy  matter  to  give  a 
rapid  and  correct  report  of  what  he  did,  was, 
thought  and  wished  to  achieve.  The  hterature 
about  Luther  has  grown  to  such  proportions  that 
with  its  two  thousand  volumes,  large  and  small, 
it  forms  a  complete  moderately  sized  library.  Withal 
it  is  so  many-tongued,  so  multiform  and  varied  that 
one  is  struck  with  fear  after  a  mere  cursory  glance 
through  the  endless  list  of  titles,  or  upon  attempting 
merely  to  remember  the  names  of  the  authors  of  the 
more  than  two  hundred  biographies  of  Luther  in 
Latin,  German,  French,  English,  Danish,  Swedish, 
Italian,  Spanish,  Russian,  Polish  and  Lithuanian. 
Stranger  sensations  still  take  hold  of  one  when  dip- 
ping into  a  few  dozen  of  these  biographies  in  addition 
to  half  a  dozen  novels  on  Luther  and  dramas  about 
him.  The  most  immediate  impression  derived  from 
this  process  is  that  there  are  as  many  Luthers  as  books 
about  him;  so  widely  divergent  are  the  views  of  the 


8      LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  EECENT  RESEARCH 

writers  about  the  essence  and  worth  of  Luther's  per- 
son and  work.  To  the  one  he  appears  as  a  prophet  of 
God,  to  the  other  as  a  changeling  of  Satan ;  for  one  he 
is  a  model  citizen,  excellent  father,  and  affectionate 
husband,  for  the  other  a  criminal  of  the  deepest  moral 
depravity;  for  some  a  productive  genius  of  the  fore- 
most order,  for  others  an  intellectually  inferior,  or  at 
least  anormal  individual;  to  some  he  is  one  of  the 
foremost  enlighteners  of  all  times,  to  others  an  Obscur- 
antist, a  henchman  of  the  princes  and  a  firebrand  of 
the  worst  type. 

Was  Luther  in  reality  such  a  complicated  and  ill- 
defined  character,  or  is  the  tradition  about  his  life  so 
scant,  open  to  so  many  different  interpretations  and  so 
vague  that  historians  of  necessity  arrived  at  such 
radically  varying  conclusions?  By  no  means.  Our 
sources  are  in  this  instance  as  ample,  clear  and  con- 
nected as  we  could  wish  them  to  be,  and  the  character 
of  Luther  in  the  genuine  documents  in  no  way  conveys 
the  impression  of  being  complicated.  Hence  the  fault 
this  time  lies  with  the  historians.  Some  would  not, 
others  could  not  see  the  real  character  of  Luther. 
And  why  ?  Because  they  approached  the  records  with 
concrete,  preconceived  opinions,  and  therefore  natur- 
ally saw  only  what  seemed  to  suit  their  view.  This 
failing,  however,  must  not  be  laid  at  their  door  alone. 
Most  of  them  worked  under  the  influence  of  a  psycho- 
logical force  from  which  they  found  it  difficult  to 
emancipate  themselves.  They  allowed  their  judg- 
ments to  be  guided  by  the  ideas  and  ideals  of  their 
religious  belief  and  their  age  and  involuntarily  inter- 


DEVELOPMENT  OF  RESEARCH  9 

preted  the  sources  accordingly.  If  this  fact  be  taken 
into  account  the  grotesque  differences  of  conception 
become  psychologically  quite  intelligible,  then  this 
chaos  presents  a  measure  of  order,  sequence  and  devel- 
opment, and  the  reader  learns  to  value  even  the  most 
peculiar  products  of  this  literature,  if  not  as  scientific 
achievements,  at  least  as  historical  documents,  as 
records  for  the  history  of  the  religious,  philosophical, 
political  and  social  ideas  since  the  days  of  the  Refor- 
mation. 

In  the  early  years  of  the  movement  the  Evangelical 
faction  generally  looked  upon  Luther  as  a  prophet  of 
God.  Indeed  sober  men  like  Albrecht  Diirer  spoke 
of  him  outright  as  an  inspired  personality.  Less  well- 
balanced  natures  sought  and  found  in  the  Bible  and 
the  utterances  of  mediaeval  prophets  predictions 
pointing  to  him  and  his  work.  Enthusiastic  artists 
went  so  far  as  to  represent  him  with  the  dove  of 
the  Holy  Ghost  or  with  a  halo  about  his  head. 
In  the  two  earliest  evangelical  biographies  of 
Luther,  the  Luther  Sermons  by  Cyriacus  Spangen- 
berg  and  John  Mathesius,  this  view  still  prevails, 
though  it  did  not  cloud  the  authors'  perception  of  the 
faults  and  weaknesses  of  the  Reformer,  nor  prejudice 
their  judgment  with  regard  to  them. 

But  already  Mathesius  occasionally  emphasizes  as 
the  most  noteworthy  service  of  his  hero  the  fact  "that 
he  again  scoured  the  doctrine  clean."  Herein  a  new 
view  of  Luther's  person  and  work  makes  its  appear- 
ance, one  which  by  this  time  had  become  prevalent  in 
wide  circles  and  was  destined  to  maintain  itself  in  the 


10     LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

Lutheran  Church  down  to  the  last  decades  of  the 
seventeenth  century.  It  is  the  dogmatic  conception  of 
Lutheran  Orthodoxy.  This  view  clung  to  the  belief 
that  the  Reformer  was  the  prophet  of  Germany.  The 
chief  proof  of  his  prophetic  mission  for  these  orthodox 
groups  was  the  agreement  of  his  doctrines  with  the 
teachings  of  God's  Word.  Involuntarily  the  picture 
of  the  Reformer  was  modeled  on  the  outlines  of  the 
traditional  Catholic  conception  of  a  church  father. 
The  Lutheran  people,  however,  at  the  same  time 
revered  this  father  of  the  church  as  a  veritable  saint. 
They  told  wonderful  tales  about  his  prophecies,  his 
miracles  and  his  pictures,  and  diligently  cut  splinters 
from  the  wooden  columns  in  the  house  of  Luther  at 
Wittenberg ;  for  as  in  Catholic  lands  the  relics  of  Saint 
Apollonia,  so  in  Lutheran  territory  these  slivers  were 
accounted  wonderfully  efficacious  as  remedies  for 
toothache.  Pietism  broke  away  from  the  habits  and 
point  of  view  of  Orthodoxy  in  these  matters  also.  It 
discovered  the  difference  between  Luther  and  Luther- 
anism  and  occasionally  played  off  the  former  effec- 
tively against  contemporary  manifestations  of  the 
latter.  Besides,  it  distinguished  a  young,  middle- 
aged  and  old  Luther,  and  very  freely  criticized  the  last 
two  by  calling  the  early  Luther  to  witness  against 
them.  With  the  Luther  of  the  middle  period,  of  the 
Marburg  Colloquy,  almost  no  Pietist  would  have  any 
dealings.  To  the  old  Luther  most  of  them,  with 
Albrecht  Bengel,  the  mild  patriarch  of  the  Swabian 
Hour  Men  (Stundejileute) ,  gave  the  grade  Good. 
They  all  were  truly  enthusiastic  only  about  the  young 


DEVELOPMENT  OF  RESEARCH  11 

Luther.  Him  they  extolled  not  alone  as  a  father  of 
the  faith,  a  man  of  spiritual  power  in  prayer,  a  second 
Samson,  a  victor  over  parsons  and  Philistines,  but 
as  the  true  originator  of  the  pietistic  community 
ideal  of  "the  little  churches  within  the  Church.'* 
Indeed  the  greatest  and  most  highly  gifted  among 
these  pietistic  venerators  of  Luther,  Ludwig 
Zinzendorf,  saw  salvation  for  theology  only  in  a 
return  to  the  theological  method  of  Doctor  Luther, 
and  himself  made  several  efforts  to  bring  about  such 
a  reform. 

The  Rationalists  stood  so  far  removed  from  Luther 
in  their  religious  views  that  they  were  wholly  unable 
to  understand  his  religious  personality.  The  strug- 
gles of  his  soul  were  to  them  a  disease,  his  doctrines  of 
sin  and  justification  were  at  best  looked  upon  as  a 
"perversion,"  or  as  "the  dangerous  dogmatic  extrav- 
agance of  a  great  and  courageous,  but  at  times  one- 
sided spirit."  Even  sincere  Protestants  with  Semler 
placed  "the  learned  and  righteous  Erasmus"  above 
him.  Men  who  were  wholly  apathetic  to  religion,  as, 
for  instance,  Frederick  the  Great,  judged  him  to  be  "a 
raving  monk  and  barbarous  writer,"  or  taking  their 
cue  from  Voltaire  spoke  of  him  as  a  man  who  had 
missed  his  calling.  These  radicals,  however,  found 
one  phase  in  the  character  of  the  "regenerator  of  the 
church,"  which  appealed  to  them:  his  hatred  of  the 
priests  and  his  ardor  in  the  cause  of  the  "freedom  of 
conscience." 

Milder  advocates  of  the  faith  of  reason,  though 
chiefly  admiring  the  Reformer  as  an  enemy  of  par- 


12     LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

sons  and  a  restorer  of  liberty  of  thought,  besides 
dehghted  in  praising  the  great  man  as  an  "affectionate 
husband,  honest  father,  magnanimous  friend,  excel- 
lent citizen  and  as  a  scholar  useful  to  the  public.  As 
late  as  the  Jubilee  of  1817  the  addresses  and  poems 
in  honor  of  the  occasion  were  uniformly  pitched  in  this 
key.  A  proof  of  this  is  the  beautiful  "Nightwatch- 
man's  Hymn  for  the  Year  1817": 

List,  ye  men,  and  he  advised. 
No  more  in  shackles  the  spirit  lies. 
Remember  Luther,  the  faithful  one. 
Who  hath  this  freedom  for  you  won. 
Guard  well  the  light,  the  light  of  truth, 
Cruard  well  the  fire,  profane  it  not. 

More  characteristically  perhaps  than  in  these  laud- 
atory utterances  the  spirit  of  the  times  is  revealed  in 
the  critical  remarks  we  encounter  occasionally.  The 
German  Rationalists  highly  praised  what  had  been  so 
discomforting  to  the  Pietists,  Luther's  love  of  song, 
the  pleasure  he  found  in  a  game  of  chess  or  a  drink  of 
good  wine,  his  mild  judgment  on  dancing  and  the 
theatre.  What  disturbed  them  most,  however,  was  the 
disrespectful  manner  in  which  the  Reformer  frequent- 
ly referred  to  the  princes  and  bigwigs.  Their  censure 
of  his  public  burning  of  the  bull  of  excommunication 
also  was  most  lively.  It  above  all  others  was  the  one 
act  of  the  Reformer  which  ran  counter  to  their  concep- 
tion of  gentility  and  civic  virtue. 

Now  and  then,  however,  even  in  the  heyday  of 


DEVELOPMENT  OF  RESEARCH  13 

Rationalism,  we  meet  with  instances  of  a  deeper  un- 
derstanding of  Luther's  pecuharities.  Hamann  even 
in  those  days  endeavored  to  grasp  the  prophetic  ele- 
ment in  the  Reformer  and  also  attempted  to  evaluate 
psychologically  the  harshnesses  and  paradoxes  of  his 
personality.  Young  Herder  is  found  trying  to  cut 
loose  from  all  the  artificial  criteria  of  Enlightenment, 
Pietism  and  Orthodoxy  in  forming  a  judgment  about 
Luther.  He  endeavors  to  appreciate  the  "patriotic 
and  great  man"  from  out  of  the  depth  of  his  own  per- 
sonal being  as  an  independent  phenomenon.  Never- 
theless, for  some  time  no  progress  was  made  beyond 
these  imperfect  efforts.  Herder  himself  in  his  later 
years  returned  to  the  method  and  historical  point  of 
view  of  Rationalism,  and  even  Schiller,  who  among 
the  intellectual  leaders  in  the  Germany  of  that  day 
was  most  interested  in  history,  finds  no  higher  epithet 
of  honor  for  Luther  in  his  "Secular  Hymn  on  the 
Year  1800"  than  that  of  "a  champion  of  the  freedom 
of  reason  against  error  and  the  Vatican." 

The  Romanticists  finally  showed  signs  of  adopt- 
ing a  new  conception  of  personality  which  was  likely 
to  benefit  Luther  also.  They  viewed  individual 
life  from  the  point  of  view  of  the  aesthetic 
ideal.  According  to  this  the  worth  of  a  human 
being  lies  not  in  the  usefulness  of  his  existence 
for  the  world  of  his  own  and  later  times,  nor 
even  in  his  moral  perfection,  but  solely  in  the 
originality,  fullness  and  force  of  his  nature ;  briefly,  in 
his  genius.  The  wholly  unromantic  genius  of  Luther, 
however,  kept  them  from  ever  really  coming  into 


14     LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

closer  touch  with  him.  Schelling  saw  in  the  Reforma- 
tion only  decline  and  retrogression,  and  even  Schleier- 
macher  was  so  little  clear  about  Luther's  religious 
"peculiarity"  that  in  his  lectures  on  church  history  he 
still  ventured  to  assert:  "the  Hussite  movement  and 
the  Lutheran  reform  started  from  the  same  basic 
principles."  Instead,  therefore,  of  giving  a  vivid  por- 
trayal of  Luther  to  his  hearers  he  warned  them  not  to 
overestimate  the  reformers  on  the  very  modern 
grounds  that  "in  them  as  in  projecting  points  were 
concentrated  the  general  forces." 

The  romantic  valuation  of  personality  appears 
wholly  without  qualification  in  the  utterances  of  the 
aged  Goethe  about  the  Reformer,  when  in  1817  he 
declares  that  Luther's  character  is  the  only  factor  in 
that  "confused  nonsense,"  i.  e.,  the  account  of  the 
Reformation,  which  is  of  interest  to  him.  And  again 
when  in  1826  he  testifies  to  a  lively  admiration  for  the 
unity  and  wholeness  manifested  in  Luther's  attitude, 
word  and  action,  this  is  altogether  in  keeping  with  the 
EBsthetic  historical  point  of  view  of  the  early  Roman- 
ticists. However,  the  great  poet  was  no  longer  com- 
pletely under  the  magic  influence  of  the  aesthetic 
view  of  the  world.  "Genius"  to  him  connoted  not 
merely  a  sense  for  the  harmonious  development  of 
one's  individual  existence,  but  "creative  force,  of 
which  deeds  are  born  fit  to  stand  before  the  judgment 
of  God  and  nature,  and  which  for  this  very  reason 
brings  results  and  lives  on."  Pursuant  to  this  defini- 
tion Goethe  in  1827  rates  Luther  as  "an  extraordinary 
genius"  who  had  not  then  and  probably  would  not 


DEVELOPMENT  OF  RESEARCH  15 

within  a  measurable  space  of  time  cease  to  make  his 
influence  felt. 

While  thus  aesthetic  minds,  untroubled  by  the  brutal 
misery  of  the  present,  were  constructing  their  Cloud- 
cucoovilles,  the  ignominious  yoke  of  foreign  domina- 
tion fell  heavily  on  Northern  Germany.  This  immedi- 
ately caused  a  revulsion  of  feeling  both  in  the  North 
and  in  the  South.  National  enthusiasm  replaced  the 
complacent  sesthetic  philosophical  culture,  spiritual 
revelling  was  supplanted  by  suspicion,  indeed  hatred, 
of  the  cult  of  the  beautiful  and  by  the  harsh  pathos  of 
political  passions.  As  a  result  we  find  an  inevitable 
change  in  the  judgment  of  the  nation  about  its  own 
past.  While  people  almost  contemptuously  turned 
from  Frederick  the  Great  they  began  under  the 
leadership  of  Arndt  and  Jahn  to  passionately  revere 
Luther  as  a  national  hero,  as  the  archetype  of  German 
piety,  manly  courage,  and  love  of  liberty.  Indeed, 
they  naively  placed  the  Reformer  by  the  side  of  the 
old  Bliicher  and  requisitioned  him  even  in  support 
of  the  purely  political  ideals  of  the  time. 

In  the  ranks  of  rising  Liberalism  this  new  nation- 
alistic conception  of  Luther  was  still  somewhat  tinged 
with  the  old  rationalistic  valuation  of  the  Reformer. 
Leber echt  Uhlich,  Baltzer  and  other  Friends  of  Light 
praised  the  Wittenberg  hero  not  as  the  great  German 
only,  but  also  as  the  supreme  enlightener.  However, 
in  these  strata  of  the  population  the  interest  in  Luther, 
especially  after  Herwegh's  triumphal  progress 
through  Germany,  had  been  materially  weakened  by 
the  enthusiasm  for  the  newly  discovered  "Saviour," 


16     LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

Ulrich  von  Hutten,  whose  resounding  catch  phrases 
were  indeed  much  better  suited  to  these  political  poets 
and  journalists  than  the  absolutely  non-pathetic  utter- 
ances of  "Father  Luther." 

After  all,  though,  Liberalism  never  quite  dominated 
public  opinion  to  the  extent  of  Rationalism.  On  the 
contrary,  intellectual  development  ever  since  the 
days  of  Romanticism  shows  a  tendency  to  ever  greater 
cleavage  and  disintegration.  Most  characteristically 
this  is  brought  out  in  the  verdicts  about  the  person  and 
work  of  Luther.  All  the  manifold  views  of  earlier 
stages  of  evolution  experienced  a  sort  of  resurrection 
in  the  course  of  the  nineteenth  century.  Only  the 
naivete  and  assurance  with  which  older  scholars  had 
asserted  their  attitude  was  lacking.  It  was  impossible 
now  for  any  party  to  wholly  escape  the  influences  of 
historical  criticism,  and  each  group  was  therefore 
forced  to  defend  its  standpoint  against  differing  con- 
ceptions. 

In  the  historical  point  of  view  of  the  strict  New 
Lutheran  school  the  Reformer  again  appeared  as 
church  father.  For  that  reason  they  as  far  as  possible 
caused  him  to  approach  Lutheran  Orthodoxy  and 
summarily  disavowed  the  younger  Luther  as  "a  per- 
sonality still  quite  unclarified  and  wallowing  in  sub- 
jective extravagances."  (Kliefoth.)  They  accepted 
Luther  as  master  and  model  only  in  the  middle  and 
later  period  of  his  career.  Radical  Protestants  of  the 
Tubingen  school,  as  whose  characteristic  representa- 
tive we  may  regard  Heinrich  Lang,  on  the  contrary 
would  have  no  dealings  with  this  later  Luther.    They 


DEVELOPMENT  OF  KESEARCH  17 

venerated  only  the  young  Luther,  and  him  only  in  so 
far  as  he  was  "a  genius  and  national  hero."  As  a 
reformer  Luther  was  to  them  merely  a  representative 
of  the  Catholic  view  of  life  and  in  no  way  the  equal  of 
such  men  as  Zwingli,  Karlstadt  and  the  leaders  of  the 
Anabaptists  and  rebellious  peasants. 

Albrecht  Ritschl  made  another  attempt  to  compre- 
hend Luther  as  a  religious  prophet.  To  make  this 
possible  he  removed  him  from  Lutheran  Orthodoxy 
as  far  as  he  could  and  extolled  particularly  the  young 
Luther.  In  his  mind  the  really  great  achievement  of 
the  prophet  Luther  was  the  setting  up  of  "the  new  ideal 
of  perfection."  Upon  closer  inspection,  however,  this 
ideal  was  found  not  to  be  a  genuine  Lutheran  prod- 
uct, but  a  hybrid  of  purely  Lutheran  ideas  and  cer- 
tain basic  religious  and  ethical  principles  of  the  old 
Rationalism.  Therefore  it  is  hardly  surprising  that 
for  instance  the  disciples  of  Ritschl  in  their  appraise- 
ment of  Luther  should  also  have  returned  to  the  views 
of  the  radical  Rationalists.  Harnack's  History  of 
Dogma  marked  the  first  step  in  this  direction.  In  it 
Luther  was  once  again  brought  closer  to  Orthodoxy, 
criticized  severely  on  particular  points,  and  "the  great 
epoch  of  his  life,  the  years  from  1519  to  1521"  esti- 
mated merely  as  an  episode  in  which  Luther  in  reality 
"had  not  been  himself,  but  had  been  lifted  up  out  of 
the  limits  of  his  being." 

This  rationalistic  standpoint,  though  with  consid- 
erable modification  in  detail  due  to  points  of  view  of 
romantic  philosophy  and  modern  religious  criticism, 
is  again  reached  in  the  recent  writings  of  E.  Troeltsch. 


18  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

Herein,  as  previously  in  Semler's  attempt  at  a  free 
theological  method,  Erasmus  of  Rotterdam  is  placed 
above  Luther  and  the  Reformer's  religious  attitude,  as 
H.  Lang  had  done  before  in  his  "Luther,"  is  in  its 
essential  phases  merely  rated  as  a  recasting  of  the 
"mediaeval  ideal." 

While  thus  theology  is  once  more  approaching  the 
ideas  and  methods  of  Rationalism  the  broader  strata 
of  the  cultured  world  are  again  being  strongly  influ- 
enced by  the  esthetic  point  of  view  of  Romanticism, 
particularly  through  the  writings  of  Friedrich  Nietz- 
sche.* As  a  rule,  however,  the  "genius"  Luther  is 
even  less  sympathetic  to  this  new  school  of  Romanti- 
cists than  it  had  been  to  the  old.  "Luther  the  plebeian, 
the  great  rustic  whose  mental  horizon  is  bounded  by 
the  space*  taken  up  by  his  hobnailed  shoes,"  "the  bar- 
barian," "the  demagogue,"  "the  originator  of  the 
peasant  rebellion  of  the  North  against  the  Southern 
ecclesiastical  organism  of  government  which  assured 
supremacy  to  the  more  intellectual  man,"  the  "Ger- 
man monk  who,  filled  with  all  the  vindictive  instincts 
of  a  priest,  cheated  Europe  out  of  its  last  great 
cultural  harvest,  the  Renaissance,  and  who  ruined 
the  prospect  resplendent  in  all  the  horrors  of  exquisite 
beauty  of  seeing  Caesar  Borgia  (he  died  March  12, 
15071)  as  Pope  abolish  Christianity" — this  Luther 
appears  pitiably  small  to  some  of  these  newer  Roman- 
ticists, over  against  such  vaunted  supermen  as  that 
savage  son  of  a  pope  in  whose  person  "life  itself,  the 


*Who,  by  the  way,  was  wholly  under  the  spell  of  Janssen.    See 
his  Letters,  Inselverlag,  Leipzig,  1911,  p.  222. 


DEVELOPMENT  OF  RESEARCH  19 

triumph  of  life,  the  great  Aye  to  all  that  is  grand, 
beautiful  and  audacious"  reached  out  for  mastery 
in  the  church. 

Whenever  these  advocates  of  New  Romanticism 
prove  accessible  to  religious  sentiment  (and  such  in- 
stances are  not  rare),  they  mostly  turn  to  pantheism, 
as  older  romanticists  had  done,  and  in  that  case  nat- 
urally they  looked  and  still  look  upon  the  Reformer  as 
a  representative  of  a  backward  piety,  a  "Judaist"  who, 
though  he  learned  a  great  deal  from  the  German 
Mystics  of  the  fourteenth  century,  is  nevertheless 
inferior  to  these  godly  men  "of  the  last  period  of 
originality  in  Germanic  religion." 

Popular  writing  of  the  more  recent  past  is  aston- 
ishingly little  affected  by  all  these  changes  of  opinion 
on  the  person  and  achievement  of  the  Reformer.  It 
is  still  dominated  chiefly  by  the  narrow  conceptions 
of  vulgar  Rationalism.  To  them  Luther  stands  forth 
as  "the  affectionate  husband,  honest  father,  true 
friend,  the  scholar  useful  to  the  community,  the  model 
citizen,  great  patriot  and  undaunted  champion  against 
Rome."  The  austere  and  sturdy,  rough  and  powerful, 
popular  and  original  features  have  magically  dis- 
appeared from  the  portrait  of  the  Reformer,  the  lion 
has  become  a  tame  pussy,  the  terror  of  all  the  Philis- 
tines of  his  day  has  become  a  typical  German  domestic 
Philistine  who,  though  he  after  the  true  manner  of 
German  domestic  tyrants  often  growls  mightily  and 
makes  a  scene,  is  in  reality  quite  harmless  and  would 
not  injure  a  fly.  However,  this  trite  historical  point  of 
view  and  hero  worship  have  long  ago  been  called  to  a 


20  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

halt  and  relegated  to  where  they  will  not  be  able  to  put 
on  airs  any  further. 

A  noted  jurist  once  said:  *'The  German  people  have 
thrice  loved:  Karl  the  Great,  Luther  and  Bismarck." 
With  equal  justice  one  might  say:  "The  Germans 
have  three  times  hated:  Karl  the  Great,  Luther  and 
Bismarck."  No  man,  however,  did  they  love  more 
strongly  and  hate  more  violently,  no  man  is  even  now 
more  candidly  loved  and  hated  by  them  than  Luther. 
Indeed,  hatred  and  aversion  toward  the  Reformer  are 
to-day  perhaps  more  widespread,  certainly  more 
active,  than  love  for  him,  for  those  very  men  who  now 
control  the  masses  will  have  nothing  of  him. 

Already  during  the  lifetime  of  Luther  this  antago- 
nism and  enmity  brought  together  two  powerful 
parties  which  otherwise  fought  one  another  bitterly: 
revolutionary  radicalism  and  Catholicism.  In  order 
to  discredit  the  Reformer's  doctrines  both  attacked 
also  his  person  and  in  their  efforts  drew  a  picture  of 
him  which  differed  from  the  idealistic  portraits  of  the 
Evangelical  faction  as  day  from  night.  The  concep- 
tion of  Luther  among  the  revolutionary  radicals  in  its 
general  outlines  harks  back  to  Karlstadt  and  Thomas 
Miinzer.  The  detailed  execution  of  it  and  the 
retouching  is  the  work  of  the  nineteenth  century  and 
was  done  by  such  men  as  Zimmermann,  Kautsky  and 
Bios,  the  historians  of  the  radical  burgher  parties  and 
of  social  democracy.  In  less  striking  colors  and 
altered  to  suit  the  tastes  of  the  national  socialists  it  was 
very  recently  embodied  in  Barge's  bulky  book  on 
"Karlstadt." 


DEVELOPMENT  OF  RESEARCH  21 

Slightly  different  in  shading  and  argument  we  now 
find  this  picture  also  in  the  historical  works  of  the 
radical  Pietists,  Darlyists,  Adventists,  Pentecostmen 
and  whatever  else  their  names  may  be.  The  sole  cri- 
terion of  the  historical  opinion  set  forth  in  these  trea- 
tises is  the  aversion  Luther  felt  for  Karlstadt, 
Miinzer,  Schwenckfeld  and  their  associates,  and  his 
attitude  during  the  peasant  revolt.  The  former  brings 
him  the  honorary  title,  "the  dull,  self-indulgent  beast 
of  Wittenberg,"  the  latter  such  pleasant  names  as 
bloodthirsty  firebrand  and  venal  henchman  of  the 
princes,  also  causing  the  accusation  that  he  is  a  reac- 
tionary parson  and  hostile  to  the  interests  of  the 
people,  etc.  But  Radicalism  never  was  wont  to  pay 
very  much  attention  to  historical  facts.  All  the  more 
zealously  the  Catholic  party  has  ever  tried  to  forge 
from  the  history  of  the  past  weapons  for  the  conflicts 
of  the  present. 

Before  the  Lutherans  had  found  time  to  write  a 
detailed  biography  of  Luther,  the  first  Catholic 
account  of  his  life  appeared  (1549).  Its  author  was 
an  old  foe  of  the  Evangelical  party,  the  Breslau  canon 
John  Cochlaeus  from  Wendelstein,  who  ever  since  the 
days  of  Worms  had  been  tirelessly  crossing  swords 
with  the  Reformer.  The  portrait  he  paints  in  his  book 
is  the  complete  antithesis  of  the  ideal  conception  of 
the  Protestants.  While  in  the  latter  Luther  stands 
forth  as  "a  divinely  inspired  man,"  Cochlaeus 
depicts  him  with  even  greater  emphasis  as  a  child 
of  the  devil  whom  Satan  himself  begot  in  adulterous 
union  with  Margaret  Luther.     Hence  as  a  mere 


22     LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

infant  the  unfortunate  offspring  manifested  such 
a  strange  and  savage  nature  that  his  own  mother 
later  felt  sorry  that  she  had  not  immediately- 
murdered  the  changeling  in  the  cradle.  In  the 
monastery  also  discerning  brothers  soon  saw  what 
manner  of  man  he  was,  and  later  on  indeed  no  sensible 
person  could  harbor  any  doubts  on  this  point.  At 
Luther's  death,  of  course,  this  mysterious  "father" 
is  also  brought  into  play.  He  appears  just  in  time 
and  carries  his  loyal  evangelist  off  to  hell. 

This  conception  of  the  Reformer  as  the  son  of  Satan 
was  very  popular  in  the  Catholic  world  down  to  the 
eighteenth  century. 

But  even  in  the  sixteenth  century  it  was  not  always 
believed  necessary  to  conjure  up  the  devil  in  order  to 
help  elucidate  the  problem  Luther.  Occasionally 
Luther  was  permitted  to  count  as  a  human  being,  but 
in  that  case  he  was,  as,  for  instance,  by  Thomas  Miin- 
zer  as  early  as  1520,  portrayed  as  the  German  Cati- 
line, i.  e.,  as  a  great  criminal.  Others,  with  Pallavi- 
cini,  called  him  a  savage  Cyclops  whose  fertile  and 
powerful  mind  had  brought  forth  only  colossal  mon- 
strosities and  whose  vaunted  courage  was  but  the 
courage  of  a  despairing  beast.  This  view  of  Luther 
likewise  found  many  adherents.  In  Bavaria,  ,  for 
instance,  at  the  opening  of  the  nineteenth  century, 
peasants  were  wont  still  to  parade  Doctor  Luther 
and  his  Katie  side  by  side  with  the  Bavarian  Hiesel 
and  the  notorious  Schinderhannes  in  their  Shrove 
Tuesday  processions. 

In  the  days  of  enlightenment,  however,  educated 


DEVELOPMENT  OF  RESEARCH  23 

Catholics,  who  were  convinced  of  the  necessity  and 
value  of  "Church  reform"  very  closely  approximated 
the  view  of  enlightened  Protestants.  Even  Catholic 
theologians  began  now  to  judge  the  Reformer  as  "a 
precious  instrument  of  the  Lord,"  "a  great  bringer  of 
light,"  "an  honest  character"  and  "the  greatest  bene- 
factor of  humanity."  On  the  other  hand,  certain 
among  these  theologians  emphasized  even  more 
strongly  than  Semler  that  Erasmus  had  been  greater 
than  Luther.  One  of  their  number,  Franz  Berg, 
Professor  of  Church  History  at  Wiirzburg  (he  died 
1821),  risked  a  highly  modern  assertion:  the  doctrine 
of  justification  in  the  hand  of  Luther  was  just  as  much 
a  product  of  superstition  as  in  that  of  Paul,  the  Refor- 
mation in  the  same  measure  a  hindrance  to  enlighten- 
ment as  the  Counter-Reformation.  On  the  whole, 
however,  a  tone  of  joyous  recognition,  a  feeling  of 
spiritual  kinship  dominates.  Individual  Catholic 
Romanticists,  as  for  example,  Eichendorf,  and  roman- 
ticizing converts  like  Leopold  von  Stolberg  still  evince 
a  lively  sympathy  for  "Luther's  heroic,  thoroughly 
popular  personality." 

After  the  July  Revolution  there  is  a  complete 
change  of  sentiment.  Old  opinions  were  once  more 
brought  to  honor  though  they  now  wear  modern  attire 
and  are  much  more  delicately  substantiated.  Very 
learned  professors  like  Adam  Mohler  again  know 
of  very  intimate  relations  between  Luther  and  Satan. 
But  they  avoid  calling  the  child  by  its  right  name, 
they  are  content  to  delicately  hint  at  the  hideous 
secret.    Nevertheless,  people  have  come  to  feel  that  it 


24  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

has  ceased  to  be  modern  to  cite  Satan  for  the  solution 
of  a  psychological  problem.  Therefore  they  prefer 
to  explain  Luther's  "possession"  as  a  sort  of  insanity. 
This,  for  example,  is  done  by  Friederich  van  Kerp  in 
1810.  Others,  with  Bruno  Schon,  the  Austrian  monk 
and  alienist,  sympathetically  affirm  that  the  so-called 
greatest  offspring  of  the  German  nation  at  least  tem- 
porarily suffered  from  persecutory  mania,  megalo- 
mania, hallucinations,  illusions,  sexual  hyper^esthesia 
and  "transitory  dementia.'* 

When  the  Reformer  is  not  directly  regarded  as 
insane  he  is  looked  upon,  for  example  recently  by 
Hartmann  Grisar,  S.  J.,  as  a  monomaniac  burdened 
with  hereditary  nervousness  and  with  a  tendency  to 
autochthonous  and  "exaggerated"  ideas.  Others  again, 
like  the*  jurist  Jarcke,  in  their  judgment  of  his  theo- 
logoumena  kindly  take  account  of  his  unusually  per- 
sistent digestive  disturbances  by  which  unfortunately 
Luther  was  troubled.  While  writers  thus  treated  the 
heretic  as  a  sick  man,  they  robbed  themselves  of  the 
possibility  of  dragging  him  before  the  judgment  seat 
of  morality.  For  that  reason,  whenever  a  case  of 
doubt  arose,  they  reverted  to  the  view  which  Thomas 
Miinzer  had  championed  as  early  as  1520;  that  is,  they 
regarded  the  accused  as  the  German  Catiline,  though 
their  method  is  much  more  prudent  and  cautious  than 
that  of  the  old  mendicant.  They  do  not  any  more 
bluntly  and  rudely  call  Luther  a  great  criminal; 
rather  he  is  in  the  objective  tone  of  the  seasoned  crimi- 
nologist depicted  as  a  wholly  impure,  deeply  immoral 
individual.      (DoUinger,  Janssen,  Audin,  Maraval, 


DEVELOPMENT  OF  RESEARCH  25 

Grisar.)  Others  are  content  with  Denifle  to  brand 
him  officially  as  a  "superman,"  though  this  in  reality- 
is  only  a  euphemism  for  criminal  monster,  "knave," 
degenerate,  type  of  the  deepest  moral  decline  and 
decay. 

Taken  as  a  whole  the  tone  of  these  polemics  which 
masquerade  as  history  has  in  the  course  of  centuries 
become  materially  refined.  Its  early  representatives 
as  it  were  painted  with  dirt  so  that  Lutherans  justly 
spoke  of  their  rooting  in  excrementis  Lutheri.  To- 
day they  not  infrequently  show  an  admirable  skill  in 
concealing  their  inbred  loathing  of  the  archheretic 
behind  the  cold  mask  of  the  impartial  judge.  Their 
method,  however,  is  still  that  of  the  approved  masters 
and  models  of  the  wild  days  of  religious  warfare.  As 
far  as  possible  the  sources  themselves  are  made  to  give 
testimony,  but  only  those  sources  which  favor  the 
writer's  point  of  view.  In  a  sense  Luther  is  made 
his  own  judge  in  that  authors  carefully  cull  from  his 
works  and  speeches  all  utterances  which  seem  to  place 
his  character  in  a  bad  light.  Even  these  statements, 
however,  are  not  always  reported  in  full,  or  they  are 
torn  from  their  natural  context  and  misinterpreted  at 
every  point.  Grisar  furnishes  a  recent  example  of 
this  method. 

This  ingenious  process,  which  has  found  in  Dol- 
linger  and  Janssen  its  expert  exponents,  is  now  more 
than  three  hundred  years  old,  for  its  real  inventor  is 
the  Hessian  physician  John  Pistorius,  who  died  in 
1608.  He  had  already  issued  numerous  polemics 
when  he  hit  upon  the  idea — a  very  natural  one,  to  be 


26     LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

sure,  for  a  medical  man — of  dissecting  the  dead 
Luther.  To  this  end  he  read  the  works  of  that  "helHsh 
person"  three  times  from  cover  to  cover  and  prepared 
a  prodigious  collection  of  quotations  from  which 
incontrovertible  proof  was  to  be  furnished  that  the 
so-called  Reformer  had  been  possessed  by  no  less  than 
seven  evil  spirits,  namely,  the  sensuous  spirit,  the 
blasphemous  spirit,  the  sloven  spirit,  the  spirits  of 
error,  of  insolence  and  of  pride,  the  spirit  of  fraud 
and  the  turncoat  spirit.  This  truly  spirited  collec- 
tion nourished  the  whole  Catholic  controversial  lit- 
erature for  the  next  two  hundred  years,  though  the 
successors  of  the  wrathful  doctor  mostly  excelled  him 
in  ability  to  strike  the  popular  note. 

The  Jesuit,  Conrad  Vetter,  for  instance,  assumed 
in  his  "Helle  Prob"  (Clear  Test),  the  innocent  guise 
of  an  arch-Lutheran  theologian  and  then  brought 
together  from  the  inexhaustible  stock  of  Swabian 
vulgar  obloquy  such  a  superb  collection  of  epithets 
that  students  of  German  may  still  use  his  work  with 
profit.  He  was  outdone  by  the  Strassburg  ecclesi- 
astic, Nicholas  Weisslinger.  The  very  title  of  his 
book,  "Root  Hog  or  Die,"  which  appeared  in  the  first 
edition  in  1723,  gives  promise  of  much  pleasant  enter- 
tainment to  the  reader.  This  hope  is  not  betrayed,  for 
in  his  treatise  the  sacrce  tlieologice  polejjiicce  studiosus 
so  soundly  berates  the  gospelless  heretic,  the  stinking 
blasphemer,  dirty  fellow,  scamp,  boor  of  boors, 
mucker,  backbiter,  blackguard  Luther,  and  all  the 
Lutheran  lousiness,  the  Lutheran  vermin,  mudlarks 
and  tinker's  rabble  that  it  well-nigh  takes  the  reader's 


DEVELOPMENT  OF  RESEARCH  27 

breath  away.  Such  geniuses  of  rudeness,  however, 
have  always  been  able  to  count  on  a  grateful  audience 
in  Germany.  We  are  not  surprised,  therefore,  to  find 
that  Weisslinger  and  his  older  and  younger  fellow 
controversialists  are  still  much  read,  used  and  even 
imitated.  The  former  Jesuit  Berlichingen  very 
recently  sat  in  judgment  over  Luther  altogether  in 
the  style  of  Weisslinger.  The  learned  Father  Denifle 
himself  has  not  found  it  beneath  his  dignity  to  draw 
upon  the  rich  treasury  of  these  ancient  and  coarse  po- 
lemics and  occasionally  to  copy  their  fresh  and  pithy 
style. 

An  old  adage  has  it  that  love  is  blind  while  the  eye 
of  hatred  is  keen.  With  equal  justice  it  might  be 
affirmed  that  hatred  makes  people  bhnd  and  that  the 
eye  of  love  sees  sharply.  But  this  again  would  be  only 
half  the  truth.  There  is  a  blind  love  and  a  blind 
hatred.  Nothing  is  better  proof  of  this  fact  than  the 
history  of  Luther  after  his  death  both  in  polite  and 
learned  literature.  Whoever  seeks  the  real  Luther 
in  these  sources  will  never  find  him  and  will  always 
remain  uncertain  as  to  who  and  what  the  oft-men- 
tioned man  really  was,  whether  he  was  a  prophet  of 
God  or  a  son  of  the  devil,  a  father  of  the  church  or  a 
gospelless  heretic,  the  prototype  of  a  true  evangelical 
teacher  and  man  of  prayer  or  a  great  criminal,  an  en- 
lightener  and  mighty  liberator  of  the  spirit  or  a  de- 
stroyer of  the  last  cultural  harvest  of  Europe,  a  "gen- 
ius of  the  first  rank"  or  an  intellectually  inferior  de- 
generate, even  a  poor  maniac,  the  greatest  child  of 
the  German  people  or  the  Catihne  of  Germany  who 


28  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

was  responsible  for  the  moral  and  intellectual  decline 
of  his  country  in  the  sixteenth  and  seventeenth  cen- 
turies, the  type  of  a  savage  revolutionary  or  a  blood- 
thirsty firebrand  and  venal  henchman  of  the  princes, 
"an  affectionate  husband,  honest  father,  faithful 
friend,  a  scholar  useful  to  the  community,  a  good  citi- 
zen" or  "a  frantic  beast,  filthy  hog,  a  vacillating  turn- 
coat, frivolous  liar,  shameless  sensualist,  wrathy 
brawler,  hyperbolic  Thrason  (braggart) ,  insolent  Go- 
hath,  Markolfian  ribald,  public  seducer  of  nuns." 

Whoever  desires  to  acquaint  himself  with  the  true 
Reformer  must  cast  aside  all  these  wild  caricatures, 
these  portraits  ofttimes  too  fulsome  in  their  praise  of 
him,  and  must  seek  Luther  where  alone  he  can  be 
found:  in  the  genuine  tradition.  Unhappily  these 
genuine-sources,  like  precious  metals,  are  rarely  found 
pure  and  unalloyed  and  so  readily  accessible  that  one 
needs  only  to  grasp  them.  In  most  cases  they  must  be 
hunted  up  and  unearthed  from  libraries  and  archives 
and  freed  from  impurities.  Even  then  the  product, 
like  gold,  is  of  value  only  to  him  who  appreciates  and 
knows  how  to  use  it. 

The  age  of  Orthodoxy  and  of  the  Coimter-Refor- 
mation  believed  that  it  knew  who  Luther  was  without 
knowing  the  sources  about  him.  For  that  reason  it 
took  little  trouble  to  collect  the  works  of  the  Reformer 
and  the  documents  relating  to  his  life.  Also  it  solely 
used  them  to  prove  either  that  he  had  been  a  man  of 
God  and  a  saint  or  that  he  was  an  archheretic  and 
great  criminal.  In  the  Lutheran  camp  this  purely 
dogmatic  view  of  history  ceased  in  the  days  of  Pietism. 


DEVELOPMENT  OF  RESEARCH  29 

Criticism  then  awakened,  and  with  it  a  scholarly 
interest  in  the  life  and  deeds  of  Luther.  Veit  Ludwig 
von  Seckendorff  furnished  the  first  history  of  the 
Reformation  based  on  a  study  of  the  documents.  In 
it,  despite  the  apologetic  character  of  the  title,  a 
scholar's  love  of  evidence  dominates.  Thereupon 
Valentin  Ernst  Loscher,  J.  C.  Kapp  and  S.  Cyprian 
began  to  assemble  the  documents  on  the  history  of  the 
Reformation  from  the  libraries  and  archives,  and  the 
untiring  Johann  Georg  Walch  from  1740  on  under- 
took the  publication  of  a  new  complete  edition  of 
Luther's  writings.  He  also  was  the  first  to  write 
a  strictly  scholarly,  indeed,  in  some  respects  mon- 
strously erudite,  biography  of  Luther. 

In  the  age  of  Rationalism  this  scientific  enthu- 
siasm for  investigation  gradually  subsided.  The  gen- 
eration of  antiquarians  became  extinct.  Very  little 
research  on  Luther  was  done  and  what  little  there  was 
well  illustrates  the  spirit  of  the  age.  Men  busied 
themselves  with  very  inadequate  means,  to  be  sure,  in 
collecting  the  sources  in  which  the  Luther  whom  they 
understood,  the  "father,  educator,  friend  and  citizen," 
most  unconstrainedly  revealed  himself:  the  letters  of 
Luther.  As  for  the  rest,  they  were  content  following 
the  advice  of  Semler  to  make  excerpts  from  his  best- 
known  works.  They  were  of  the  opinion  that  only  in 
such  selections  could  Luther  still  "be  of  any  service." 
Plebeian  as  this  persistent  emphasis  on  usefulness 
even  in  scientific  work  may  appear  to  us  to-day,  we  yet 
must  for  this  reason  not  overlook  the  progress  which 
Rationalism  marks  in  the  writing  of  history.    It  was 


30  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

the  first  time  that  complete  intellectual  mastery  of  his 
material  was  demanded  of  the  historian.  A  psycho- 
logical interpretation  of  events  and  an  accurate 
ascertaining  of  their  connection,  strong  emphasis  on 
essentials  and  suppression  of  all  mere  antiquarian 
side  issues  was  required.  Certainly,  the  psychology  of 
the  Rationalists  was  still  indescribably  crude,  and  their 
appreciation  of  the  inner  connection  of  events  very 
superficial,  but  the  narrowness  and  clumsiness  of  the 
antiquarians  at  least  had  been  overcome. 

Romanticism  and  the  idealistic  philosophy  spring- 
ing from  it  put  an  end  to  this  purely  atomistic  view 
of  history.  But  it  was  a  case  of  driving  out  Baal  with 
the  aid  of  Beelzebub.  The  exponents  of  the  new 
method  realized  that  conscious  influence  is  of  small 
importance  in  history.  They  discovered  the  "un- 
conscious factor"  and  conceived  the  idea  of  develop- 
ment, they  placed  historical  accident  under  ban  and 
excommunication.  As  a  result  they  dropped  into 
a  new  mythology  in  that  they  thought  of  history 
as  being  the  strictly  regular  thought-process  of  an 
all-pervading  intelligence,  so  that  the  philosopher, 
as  the  organ  of  this  supreme  intelligence,  was  in 
the  happy  position  of  being  able  to  predict  the  history 
of  the  unknown  past  and  of  the  equally  unknown 
future  with  the  same  assurance  as  the  historical  de- 
velopment in  ages  much  better  authenticated  by  docu- 
mentary evidence.  Since  these  men  viewed  person- 
ality merely  as  an  organ  of  the  dominant  intelligence 
and  regarded  reason  as  its  really  distinguishing  char- 
acteristic,  they   were  wholly  unable   to   appreciate. 


DEVELOPMENT  OF  RESEARCH  31 

much  less  understand,  a  man  like  Luther,  whose  life 
seemed  to  be  swayed  by  an  intimately  personal  ex- 
perience which  could  not  be  conceived  at  all  as  a  proc- 
ess of  reasoning. 

At  this  time  Leopold  von  Ranke  came  to  the  fore. 
He  recognized  that  it  was  not  the  business  of  the  his- 
torian to  pass  judgment  on  the  past,  nor  even  to 
instruct  his  contemporaries  for  the  benefit  of  pos- 
terity. He  pointed  out  to  the  historians  their  modest 
task  of  "showing  how  things  in  reality  had  been,"  that 
is,  to  determine  from  the  sources  the  actual  facts  and 
then  to  record  the  result  simply  and  plainly,  unde- 
terred by  the  forward  interference  of  their  own 
enlightened  reason.  Thus  he  not  only  ended  the  old 
subservience  of  History  to  Philosophy  and  Theology, 
but  above  all  showed  a  clear  path  to  an  objective 
appreciation  even  of  personalities  so  much  under 
debate  as  Luther  and  Loyola.  In  his  "German 
History  in  the  Age  of  the  Reformation"  this  pos- 
sibility was  realized.  Only  since  then  have  we  a  truly 
scientific  method  for  the  investigation  of  the  history 
of  the  Reformation  and  of  Luther.  The  old  dogma- 
tizing brand  has  been  loath  to  go  into  well-merited 
retirement,  but  it  cannot  since  then  do  as  much  harm 
as  formerly.  In  the  circles  of  the  initiated  at  least 
it  has  lost  all  influence. 

Ranke's  German  History,  published  in  1839,  is  one 
of  the  few  historical  works  which  have  outlived  their 
author.  Investigation,  however,  has  self -evidently  not 
remained  stationary.  On  the  contrary,  it  has  pursued 
its  path  assiduously  and  by  dint  of  new  forms  of  or- 


32     LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

ganization  and  constant  improvement  of  its  methods 
has  experienced  a  tremendous  increase  in  capacity. 
Supremely  important  for  the  judgment  about  Luther 
was  the  coming  into  being  of  the  modern  wholesale 
methods  of  historical  research,  the  so-called  historical 
commissions  and  institutes,  for  only  with  their  help 
has  a  systematic  examination  of  the  libraries  and 
archives  been  rendered  possible.  This  new  method 
permitted  the  first  successful  attempt  at  a  critical 
edition  of  Luther's  works,  the  so-called  Weimar  Edi- 
tion, which  is  in  progress  since  1883  and  now  contains 
fifty-two  volumes.  So  immense  is  the  mass  of  the 
documentary  material  for  the  history  of  the  Refor- 
mation which  the  search  in  libraries  and  archives  has 
from  year  to  year  brought  to  light  that  the  scholar 
must  needs  have  the  digestive  faculty  of  an  ostrich  to 
be  able  to  take  in  all  this  fresh  matter  and  to  separate 
the  historically  valuable  portion  without  feeling  too 
much  oppressed  by  the  indigestible  residuum. 

More  important  still,  perhaps,  is  the  fact  that  in  the 
course  of  the  last  generation  investigators  have  set 
for  themselves  new  aims  and  are  drawing  into  the 
scope  of  historical  perception  phenomena  which 
hitherto  had  been  hardly  thought  worthy  of  notice. 
Ranke  and  his  pupils  had  in  the  main  been  content 
to  portray  the  religious  movement  and  the  political 
events  of  the  age  of  the  Reformation.  In  their  treat- 
ments princes,  diplomats  and  theologians  hold  the 
stage.  The  condition  of  the  people,  their  actions  and 
feelings  one  learns  to  know  only  incidentally. 

This  deficiency  Johannes  Janssen  was  the  first  to 


DEVELOPMENT  OF  RESEARCH  33 

clearly  recognize.  In  his  History  of  the  German 
People  since  the  End  of  the  Middle  Ages,  he  con- 
sciously chose  the  masses  as  his  hero  and  made  it  his 
object  to  determine  with  minute  care  the  economic, 
social,  political,  religious  and  moral  conditions  of  the 
day  and  to  show  the  changes  wrought  in  these  by  the 
Reformation.  It  was  a  significant  step  forward,  but 
at  first  only  in  the  putting  of  the  problem.  Janssen's 
solution  of  the  new  task  was  not  successful.  The 
reason  for  his  failure  lies  in  the  fact  that  he  did  not 
strictly  adhere  to  his  purpose,  but  allowed  himself 
constantly  to  be  driven  off  the  main  track  by  the 
apologetic  argument:  the  fifteenth  century  is  essen- 
tially an  age  of  the  highest  bloom  for  the  whole  of 
German  cultural  life,  and  it  is  Luther  alone  who 
prevented  the  harvest. 

While  older  investigators  easily  succumbed  to  the 
danger  of  isolating  the  leaders  from  their  surround- 
ings and  raising  them  too  high  above  the  masses,  they 
also  rarely  had  an  eye  for  the  relations  existing 
between  Luther  and  the  theologians  of  the  late 
Middle  Ages.  Indeed,  since  A.  Ritschl's  sharp  crit- 
icism of  the  exaggerated  estimates  of  the  services 
rendered  by  the  so-called  precursors  of  the  Reforma- 
tion it  had  become  customary  to  look  upon  Luther's 
theology  as  an  entirely  new  creation,  and  to  deny  any 
deeper  influence  of  the  Middle  Ages  upon  his  devel- 
opment. 

It  was  Denifle  who  saw  that  no  such  formal  break 
existed  in  the  history  of  intellectual  life,  and  in  his 
"Luther"  (1904)  he  endeavored  to  set  forth  how  the 


34     LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

Reformer  was  connected  with  the  so-called  "Modern 
Theologian"  of  the  late  Middle  Ages.  However,  in 
this  instance  also,  progress  lay  merely  in  the  putting 
of  the  problem.  The  question  itself  was  not  solved, 
because  Denifle  as  little  as  Janssen,  could  make  up 
his  mind  to  treat  it  in  a  purely  historical  fashion.  On 
the  contrary,  in  his  capacity  as  a  Catholic  apologist 
he  always  wished  at  the  same  time  to  demonstrate 
that  Luther  was  a  typical  example  of  decadence  and 
his  theology  the  degenerate  product  of  declining 
scholasticism.  Side  by  side  with  these  most  influen- 
tial Catholic  scholars,  others  were  busily  engaged  in 
bringing  back  from  the  dead  the  almost  forgotten 
Catholic  opponents  of  Luther:  Tetzel,  Usingen,  Eck, 
Cochlaeus,  Emser,  Schatzgeyer,  Sylvius,  Kilian,  Leib, 
and  whatever  their  names  may  be. 

Meanwhile  Protestants  preferably  paid  attention 
to  those  antagonists  of  the  Reformer  who  had  unde- 
servedly been  neglected  by  all  parties,  because  they 
had  been  unwilling  to  follow  either  the  Pope,  the 
Wittenberg  School,  or  the  Zurich  reformers:  men  like 
Karlstadt  and  Schwenckfeld,  Sebastian  Frank  and 
Erasmus  of  Rotterdam,  Thomas  Miinzer,  Hans 
Denck  and  other  Anabaptists.  In  competition  with 
a  great  number  of  local  historians  they  furthermore 
tried  to  ascertain  more  closely  the  progress  of  reform 
in  the  several  German  territories.  This  resulted  in 
the  discovery  of  a  large  number  of  stars  of  second, 
third,  fom-th  and  fifth  magnitude  besides  the  great 
star  Luther.    Also  it  furnished  a  much  clearer  and 


DEVELOPMENT  OF  RESEARCH  35 

more  forceful  and  realistic  conception  of  the  devel- 
opment of  the  Evangelical  movement  as  a  whole. 

Natm-ally  the  verdict  on  certain  groups  and  phe- 
nomena of  the  Reformation  was  thus  materially 
changed.  To  Ranke  and  other  older  students  Eras- 
mus of  Rotterdam  and  those  who  shared  his  point  of 
view  appeared  noteworthy  almost  solely  as  critics  of 
the  Catholic  system.  Now  the  positive  side  of  their 
efforts  was  stressed.  Indeed  some  wi'iters  professed 
to  see  in  them  the  direct  ancestors  of  the  religious 
enlightenment  of  the  seventeenth  and  eighteenth  cen- 
turies. Forty  years  ago  the  Anabaptists  were  still 
regarded  as  blood-red,  fanatical  revolutionaries,  be- 
sides as  narrow  and  small-minded  reactionaries,  that 
is,  they  were  held  to  be  merely  stragglers  of  the  re- 
ligious movement  in  the  late  Middle  Ages.  People 
are  now  agreed  that  the  majority  of  these  severely 
persecuted  pious  men  were  not  revolutionaries  at  all, 
but  rather  passive  and  recluse  ascetics  like  the  later 
Quakers,  not  merely  stragglers  of  mediaeval  Wal- 
densianism.  Apocalypticism  and  Mysticism,  but  in 
part  also  late  exponents  of  the  Humanistic  move- 
ment of  reform  and  above  all  opponents  of  the 
crude  literal  faith  and  moral  laxity  of  vulgar 
Lutheranism.  Some  scholars  in  fact  are  now 
prone  to  see  in  these  men,  as  in  Erasmus  and  his 
school,  the  precursors  of  new  and  powerful  religious 
currents.  They  exalt  them  as  the  direct  progenitors 
of  the  Independents  and  Pietists  above  Luther  and 
his  associates.  Since  the  Anabaptists  were  being 
given  their  due  it  was  obvious  that  those  men  ought 


36  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

no  longer  be  made  to  stand  back  who,  as  true  step- 
children of  Dame  Fortune,  had  also  been  treated  as 
such  by  the  investigators,  men  like  Caspar  von 
Schwenckfeld  and  that  greatly  misunderstood  person, 
Sebastian  Frank  of  Donauwoerth.  After  long  mis- 
representation these  were  now  at  once  rated  so  highly 
that  the  revised  opinion  on  them  amounted  almost  to 
misunderstanding.  Schwenckfeld  was  venerated  as 
the  spiritual  father  of  the  Pietistic  community  ideal 
and  Frank  even  as  the  prophet  and  forerunner  of  the 
religious  views  of  Schleiermacher. 

In  the  first  place,  therefore,  the  clarification  and 
correction  of  the  general  picture  of  the  age  which 
resulted  from  the  new  focusing  of  the  problem  and 
from  special  studies  demands  a  revision  of  the  tradi- 
tional view  of  Luther  in  many  particulars.  But  aside 
from  these  considerations  the  wealth  of  finds  in  the 
last  decades  which  bear  directly  on  Luther,  and  the 
many  monographs  caused  by  them  call  for  a  recon- 
sideration. Naturally  these  discoveries  are  often 
mere  minutiae  the  knowledge  of  which  makes  us 
neither  wiser  nor  happier.  The  fact  that  Luther  was 
very  probably  baptized  by  Father  Bartholomew  Ren- 
nebecher  on  November  11,  1483,  in  the  tower  room  of 
the  church  of  St.  Peter  and  St.  Paul  at  Eisleben;  that 
he  was  not  the  firstborn  son  as  so  far  has  been  gener- 
ally believed,  but  that  he  had  an  older  brother ;  that  in 
Eisenach  he  used  to  bring  young  Schalbe  to  school 
with  him,  and  that  as  a  student  at  ]*>furt  he  lived  in 
the  Hall  of  St.  George  on  Lehmann's  Bridge;  that 
the  maternal  uncle  to  whom  the  narents  looked  for 


DEVELOPMENT  OF  RESEARCH  37 

aid  when  they  sent  the  boy  to  school  at  Eisenach  was 
named  Conrad  Hutter  and  was  sacristan  at  the  church 
of  St.  Nicholas  there;  that  in  May,  1512,  Luther  par- 
ticipated in  the  chapter  of  his  order  in  Cologne  and 
even  viewed  the  relics  of  the  Holy  Three  Kings  there ; 
that  when  still  a  young  professor  he  once  gave  a  course 
of  lectures  on  Genesis,  and  that  on  the  Koburg  in  1530 
he  wore  spectacles  and  a  long  beard — all  these  facts 
are  certainly  not  without  interest  to  the  student  of 
Luther,  but  they  in  no  wise  compel  us  to  revise  our 
opinion  about  him  and  his  work. 

More  important  are  the  lively  discussions  about  the 
genuineness  of  the  famous  Worms  utterance:  "Here 
I  stand,  I  cannot  hold  otherwise,  God  help  me. 
Amen,"  or  about  the  time  when  the  hymn  "A  Mighty 
Fortress  Is  Our  God"  was  written,  and  lastly  about 
the  cause  and  detailed  circumstances  of  his  death. 
Even  these  points,  however,  are  not  as  weighty  as  they 
seem  to  the  participants  in  the  discussion.  Whether 
"A  Mighty  Fortress"  was  composed  in  1521  or  1528  is 
essentially  quite  immaterial.  The  haggling  over  this 
question  is  interesting  only  in  as  far  as  it  shows 
Eow  audacious,  imaginative  and  naive  some  Luther 
scholars  are  even  at  the  present  time.  All  the  writers 
who  now  with  so  much  assurance  give  1521  as  the 
year  in  which  the  hymn  was  produced,  and  who  some- 
times believe  that  they  can  precisely  indicate  the  day, 
the  hour  and  even  the  exact  spot  which  gave  Luther 
the  inspiration  for  the  immortal  poem,  innocently  cite 
as  their  sole  valid  proof  "The  Prayer  of  Martin 
Luther  at  Worms,"  a  very  doubtful  document,  which 


38  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

does  not  appear  until  1564  and  then  in  the  possession 
of  John  Aurifaber,  a  very  untrustworthy  authority. 

As  for  the  supposed  closing  words  of  Luther  at 
Worms  there  are  perhaps  very  few  students  at  present 
who  accept  them  as  authentic  in  the  form  in  which 
school  text-books  have  transmitted  them  from  gener- 
ation to  generation.  We  have  good  evidence  only  for 
the  words :  "God  help  me."  It  is  true  that  the  words : 
"I  cannot  hold  otherwise,  here  I  stand,"  occur  as 
early  as  1521  in  a  Wittenberg  print.  With  this,  how- 
ever, we  know  Luther  had  nothing  to  do.  In  the 
conventional  form  and  sequence  this  dictum  does  not 
appear  until  the  complete  Wittenberg  edition  of  1545. 
It  seems  advisable,  therefore,  not  to  cite  this  famous 
sentence  henceforth  as  an  utterance  of  Luther.  That 
will  be  difficult  for  many,  but  for  the  appreciation  of 
Luther's  attitude  in  AVorms  one  neither  gains  nor 
loses  by  this  omission.  The  important  point  is  not  that 
the  Reformer  specifically  assured  the  assembly  that 
there  he  stood  and  that  he  could  not  hold  otherwise, 
but  that  actually  he  did  stand  firm  and  could  not 
decide  otherwise. 

The  same  is  true  of  the  recent  discussions  about 
Luther's  death.  The  proof  given  by  Tschermack  that 
the  Reformer  succumbed  on  the  eighteenth  of  Febru- 
ary, 1546,  to  a  stroke  of  paralysis,  and  the  discovery 
of  Paulus  that  the  report  on  Luther's  death  which  is 
most  interesting  to  the  medical  man,  is  by  a  Catholic, 
the  apothecary  John  Landau  of  Eisleben,  are  both 
significant  inasmuch  as  they  once  again  prove  the 
Catholic  legend  about  the  Reformer's  suicide  to  have 


DEVELOPMENT  OF  RESEARCH  39 

been  a  crude  falsehood.  Earnest  students,  however, 
never  did  believe  this  untruth  which  did  not  appear  in 
Catholic  controversial  literature  until  1591,  while  the 
lower  type  of  controversialists  are  not  moved  to  dis- 
card it  even  by  thorough  refutations  published  by 
scholars  of  their  own  faith.* 

I  shall  leave  aside  all  such  details,  interesting 
though  they  may  be,  and  shall  select  from  the  mass  of 
new  discoveries  and  investigations  only  those  through 
which  the  general  picture  of  Luther's  life,  personality 
and  opinions  seems  to  have  been  modified,  enriched  or 
made  clearer.  If  I  see  aright  such  a  change  took  place 
in  the  main  in  four  directions.  We  know  more  than 
our  fathers  about  Luther's  inner  development  from  a 
"fanatic  papist"  into  a  reformer.    Furthermore,  his 


♦Luther's  death  did  not  occur  early  in  the  morning  of  the 
eighteenth  of  February  (2:45  A.M.)  in  his  sleeping  room  but  in 
the  living  room,  not  in  bed  but  on  a  bench  upholstered  in  leather. 
The  report  by  Landau  was  published  as  early  as  1548  by  Cochlaeus 
as  a  piece  of  news  from  the  letter  of  a  citizen  of  Mansfeld,  and 
since  1565  was  regularly  reprinted  in  the  appendix  of  this  author's 
biography  of  Luther.  Despite  this  fact  Paulus  was  the  first  stu- 
dent to  notice  it.  In  the  Catholic  camp  the  fable  at  first  was  spread 
that  Luther  had  been  carried  off  by  the  devil.  In  1568  another 
legend,  to  the  effect  that  the  Reformer  hanged  himself  from  one  of 
his  bedposts,  can  be  traced.  See  Hondorf :  Promptuarium  Exem- 
plorum,  p.  138  b.  It  was,  however,  at  first  found  advisable  to 
spread  this  tale  only  by  word  of  mouth.  In  1591  the  Italian  Ora- 
torian  Bozio  had  the  courage  to  champion  it  in  writing.  See 
Bozius:  De  Signis  Ecclesiee,  2,  p.  154.  He  cited  as  proof  the  pre- 
tended testimony  of  a  supposed  valet  of  Luther.  This  deposition 
the  Franciscan  Sedulius  published  verbatim  in  1606.  See  Sedulius: 
Praescriptiones  Adversus  Hsreses,  Antwerp,  p.  208  ff.  The  author 
asserts  that  he  got  the  "document"  from  an  anonymous  trust- 
worthy person  from  Freiburg  in  the  Breisgau.  This  anonymous 
citizen  of  Freiburg  is  said  to  have  acquired  it  from  a  second  anony- 
mous, "a  pious  man,"  and  this  second  anonymous  brings  into  play 
still  another,  the  supposed  valet.  The  legend  therefore  operates 
boldly  with  three  anonymous  guarantors.  See  Nicholas  Paulus: 
Luther's  Lebensende,  Freiburg,  1898.  In  spite  of  this  controver- 
sialists like  Majunke  did  not  find  it  necessary  to  drop  the  tale. 


40  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

personality  in  some  respects  appears  to  us  in  a  new 
light.  Also  the  mediaeval  background  and  the  medi- 
aeval elements  in  his  thinking  have  become  clearer  to 
us.  Lastly,  we  have  come  to  realize  that  only  then  can 
we  correctly  estimate  the  net  results  of  this  great  life, 
if  we  endeavor  to  determine  its  effect  upon  cultural 
development  in  its  whole  breadth  and  depth,  not  upon 
religion  and  theology  alone  but  also  upon  custom  and 
morality,  law  and  government,  economic  and  social 
life,  art  and  science,  literature  and  language. 

This  realization,  to  be  sure,  has  not  yet  brought 
forth  the  desired  fruit.  So  far  only  one  biographer  of 
Luther,  Arnold  Berger,  has  tried  to  portray  the 
Reformer  as  "Hero  of  Civilization."  And  yet,  the 
clear  recognition  and  concrete  setting  forth  of  prob- 
lems is  always  more  important  than  their  solution. 
The  latter  requires  only  diligence,  circumspection  and 
learning,  in  this  case,  to  be  sure,  probably  the  industry 
of  whole  generations  of  future  investigators.  For 
in  some  fields  of  the  cultural  development  of  that 
period,  for  instance,  on  the  history  of  theology,  moral- 
ity and  language,  we  are  at  present  only  very  super- 
ficially informed.  The  task,  however,  has  been  clearly 
recognized,  the  preliminary  work  has  at  many  points 
been  done,  therefore  we  may  hope  that  the  twentieth 
century  will  finally  solve  also  this  great  and  difficult 
problem. 


CHAPTER  II. 

The  Stages  in  Luther's  Conversion  to  the  Tear  151 3. 

A  MAN  who  compels  his  fellow  citizens  to  take 
"^"^  sides  for  or  against  a  cause  championed  by  him 
must  rest  content  henceforth  to  lead  his  hfe  under  the 
control  and  criticism  of  "public  opinion."  Wliatever 
he  may  be  doing  he  can  never  be  sure  that  a  good 
friend  or  crafty  foe  will  not  secretly  denounce  him  to 
contemporaries  and  posterity  by  publishing  broadcast 
his  most  intimate  private  affairs  and  most  innocent 
casual  remarks,  even  though  it  be  merely  from  a  de- 
sire for  personal  notoriety. 

This  curiosity  on  the  part  of  his  contemporaries, 
Luther  himself,  since  the  Disputation  at  Leipzig  in 
July,  1519,  so  amply  experienced  that  finally  he  reg- 
istered furious  complaints.*  His  enemies  observed 
with  suspicion  even  the  ring  he  wore,  for  might  not  the 
devil  be  hidden  in  it?  They  watched  closely  his  every 
word  and  gesture  and  devoutly  noted  every  draught 
of  Malvasie  and  beer  which  he  was  careless  enough  to 
drink  in  the  presence  of  others.  His  friends  very 
early  began  to  save  every  note  and  scrap  of  paper 
from  his  study,  they  busily  transcribed  not  only  his 
sermons  and  lectures,  but  since  1531  even  his  conver- 


*In  order  to  illustrate  Luther's  deep  resentment  over  this  dis- 
concerting   curiosity    of    his    contemporaries,    Professor    Bohmer 
quotes  an  angry  remark  by  the  Reformer.    It  has  not  been  trans- 
lated because  it  is  not  in  accordance  with  modern  literary  taste. 
41 


42     LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

sation  at  the  supper  table,  indeed,  they  minutely 
recorded  whenever  he  was  troubled  with  headache  or 
pains  in  the  chest  or  was  bothered  by  mosquitoes. 
They  wrote  down  when  he  was  cheerful  or  serious, 
angry  or  in  a  joking  mood. 

All  this  watching  and  spying,  however,  would  have 
helped  the  curious  very  little  had  Luther  been  as 
close-mouthed  as  Calvin,  as  reserved  and  careful  and 
so  completely  master  of  all  his  gestures  and  moods  as 
Loyola.  But  the  Reformer  was  a  true  Thuringian 
and  hence  by  nature  not  silent,  nor  a  "step-easy,"  nor 
given  to  grand  manners  and  smooth  civilities.  With- 
out anxious  concern  about  his  dignity,  he  spoke 
before  his  friends  and  those  who  shared  his  home  on 
absolutely  everything  that  moved  and  occupied  his 
mind.  -He  freely  talked  even  on  matters  which  the 
cultured  European  of  to-day  only  discusses  privately 
with  his  physician.  Ever  since  1515  he  stated  his 
opinions  without  any  consideration  or  precaution 
even  about  persons  in  high  and  exalted  positions  and 
felt  no  compunction  after  he  had  begun  to  feel  at 
home  in  pulpit  and  cathedra,  in  sermons  and  lectm-es, 
if  he  saw  fit,  to  speak  very  frankly  of  his  own  experi- 
ences, struggles,  errors  and  faults. 

Luther  did  not  drop  this  unaffected  communica- 
tiveness even  when  writing.  For  he  never  wrote 
"books"  in  the  sense  in  which  professors  nowadays 
are  wont  to  do.  In  reality  he  was  always  merely 
"contributing  to  questions  at  issue  and  to  problems  of 
the  day,"  writing  theses,  pamphlets,  polemics,  edifi- 
catory  tracts  and  sermons  the  brevity  of  which  was 


STAGES  IN  LUTHER'S  CONVERSION  43 

very  early  ridiculed  by  his  opponents.  In  these 
''booklets"  he  was  in  the  habit  of  freely  easing  his 
mind  without  the  least  worry  over  ill  report  or  mis- 
understanding about  everything  which  at  the  moment 
engrossed  his  attention.  From  these  products  we  can 
therefore  at  any  time  determine  what  at  a  given 
period  he  thought,  felt,  hated,  loved,  desired  and 
wanted.  Even  his  apparently  purely  learned  writ- 
ings are  for  this  reason  "fragments  of  a  great  con- 
fession" and  the  sum  total  of  his  works  a  single  con- 
tinuous self-revelation,  a  collection  of  confidences 
such  as  we  hardly  possess  from  any  other  important 
man. 

However,  valuable  though  this  collection  of  "con- 
fessions" may  be,  it  suffers  from  certain  defects  which 
are  sorely  felt  again  and  again.  In  the  first  place, 
it  does  not  begin  until  relatively  late  in  his  career, 
and  secondly,  it  is  very  uneven  as  regards  the  num- 
ber and  value  of  the  documents  contained  therein. 
For  the  time  from  1505  to  1513  it  consists  of  only 
three  rather  meaningless  letters,  a  receipt  and  a  few 
accidentally  preserved  marginal  notes.  During  the 
ensuing  six  years  it  is  still  quite  fragmentary.  Im- 
mediately after  that  it  suddenly  grows  so  voluminous 
that  a  novice  almost  despairs  of  knowing  what  to  do 
with  this  tremendous  amount  of  material. 

In  the  course  of  the  last  generation,  however,  so 
many  hitherto  wholly  or  partially  unknown  writings 
by  the  Reformer  and  documents  relating  to  the  his- 
tory of  his  life  from  the  twice  seven  lean  years  before 
the  Disputation  at  Leipzig  have  come  to  light  again 


44     LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

that  students  now  may  bless  these  meager  years  as 
the  period  of  their  most  abundant  harvests.  In  the 
shop  of  an  antiquary  at  Cologne  in  1877  a  student's 
notes  on  Luther's  lectures  of  the  year  1516  on  the 
Epistle  to  the  Galatians  reappeared.  A  decade  later 
Buchwald  discovered  in  the  school  library  of  the 
Zwickau  city  council  seven  old  books  which  the 
Reformer  had  evidently  studied  as  a  monk  and  had 
in  accordance  with  his  habit  industriously  annotated. 
In  the  same  place  were  found  in  1885  a  few  unknown 
early  sermons,  among  them  the  oldest  relic  of  this 
kind,  the  sketch  for  a  pentecostal  address  from  the 
year  1514.  Shortly  before  Luther's  preparations  for 
the  first  lectures  on  the  Psalter  (1513-15)  came  to 
light  again  in  Dresden,  and  simultaneously  his  own 
careful  notes  for  these  lectures  were  for  the  first  time 
published  completely. 

New  surprises  were  furnished  by  the  last  years  of 
the  past  century.  Hermann  Vopel  in  1899  discovered 
in  the  Vatican  Library  a  copy  of  Luther's  lectures  on 
Romans  (1515-16)  and  also  lecture  notes  of  a  stu- 
dent on  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  taken  in  1518. 
Hardly  had  the  excitement  in  the  learned  world  sub- 
sided somewhat,  when  it  heard,  to  its  greatest  aston- 
ishment, that  Luther's  own  manuscript  of  these  re- 
nowned lectures  on  Romans  was  reposing  safely 
though  unnoticed  in  the  show  cases  of  the  Berlin 
library.  This  surprise,  at  first  rather  more  painful 
than  pleasing  to  the  learned  librarians,  justifies  our 
hope  that  the  era  of  unexpected  finds  is  not  yet  over, 
that  somewhere  in  Germany  or  in  Rome,  the  remain- 


STAGES  IN  LUTHER'S  CONVERSION  45 

ing  "lost  manuscripts"  from  the  youthful  period  of 
the  Reformer  are  also  awaiting  discovery.  These 
are:  his  class  notes  on  the  Nichomachian  Ethics  and 
Dialectics  of  Aristotle,  on  the  Epistle  to  Titus,  the 
unfinished  commentary  on  the  Physics  of  Aristotle 
and  the  sorely  missed  correspondence  with  Staupitz 
between  1505  and  1517.  Pleasant  as  it  may  be  to 
indulge  in  such  dreams  it  would  be  ungrateful  to  for- 
get meanwhile  how  rich  we  have  already  become  and 
how  much  new  material  those  finds  offer  which  have 
now  ceased  to  be  altogether  new. 

What  we  possess  enables  us  to  observe  the  young 
monk  and  professor  Luther  at  close  range  for  weeks, 
months  and  years  while  he  is  at  work  in  the  quiet  of 
his  cell.  This  is  the  first  and  perhaps  most  gratifying 
advance  we  owe  to  this  new  material.  For  it  is  most 
edifying,  merely  to  watch  this  worker,  he  is  always  so 
engrossed  in  his  task,  so  painstakingly  conscientious 
and  accurate  even  in  seemingly  non-essential  matters. 
He  writes  out  in  full  beforehand  not  only  every  ser- 
mon but  also  every  lecture,  and,  as  though  this  were 
not  enough  of  virtue  he  later  on  prepares  a  very  neat 
and  faithful  copy  of  some  of  the  lectures.  At  times, 
therefore,  his  notes  have  the  faultless  appearance  of 
well-written  books.  A  professional  calligraphist 
could  hardly  have  done  better. 

Much  less  charming  is  the  outward  aspect  of  the 
books  of  his  library  which  have  come  down  to  us. 
They  fairly  swarm  with  markings,  notabenes  and 
marginal  glosses  of  all  kinds.  Sometimes  he  has 
filled  every  available  blank  space.  However,  what  un- 


46     LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

der  other  circumstances  would  be  offensive  is  here  an 
agreeable  sight.  For  what  do  these  blemishes  prove? 
That  Luther  did  not  merely  page  through  the  books 
which  he  took  in  hand,  but  really  read  them,  and  while 
reading  criticized,  indeed,  criticized  very  severely. 
Thus  the  mere  outward  appearance  of  his  academic 
tools  betrays  to  us  the  fact  that  already  the  young 
professor  possessed  characteristics  very  valuable  to  a 
man  of  his  calling,  namely,  thoroughness  and  dili- 
gence, accuracy  and  independence  of  judgment. 

If  then  we  examine  more  closely  his  lecture  notes 
and  preparations  we  are  struck  at  the  outset  by  the 
prodigious  progress  made  by  the  young  professor  as 
instructor  and  scholar  in  the  space  of  a  few  years.  In 
his  first  theological  lectures  on  the  Sentences  of  Peter 
Lombard;  1509-10,  he  still  moves  in  the  beaten  path, 
as  far  as  we  can  judge  from  the  available  notices. 
Also  in  his  lectures  on  the  Psalms  he  still  altogether 
follows  mediaeval  pedagogical  custom  both  in  ar- 
rangement and  method.  Nevertheless,  he  is  begin- 
ning to  make  considerable  use  of  the  Humanists 
Faber  and  Reuchlin;  he  already  feels  it  necessary  to 
learn  Hebrew  and  occasionally,  as  far  as  his  scant 
scientific  apparatus  permits,  he  refers  to  the  Hebrew 
original  of  which  a  printed  edition  lay  before  him. 
The  lectures  on  Romans  also  still  in  their  external 
appearance  look  typically  mediaeval. 

However,  though  he  faithfully  continues  to  em- 
ploy the  mediaeval  exegetical  apparatus  and  always 
in  accordance  with  mediaeval  practice  expounds  the 
text  two,  and  even  three  times,  he  has  in  this  case 


STAGES  IN  LUTHER'S  CONVERSION  47 

almost  entirely  overcome  the  exegetical  methods  of 
the  Middle  Ages.  He  is  now  much  more  impressed 
by  the  Humanists  than  by  Lyra  and  Paul  of  Burgos. 
Therefore,  as  soon  as  the  edition  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment by  Erasmus  is  available  he  follows  the  Greek 
original  as  a  matter  of  principle  and  with  the  aid  of 
his  poor  dictionaries  endeavors  in  the  manner  of 
Erasmus,  also  to  explain  the  text  linguistically. 

He  is,  however,  not  minded  to  follow  Erasmus  and 
the  Humanists  through  thick  and  thin.  He  perceives 
clearly  that  they  are  wanting  in  just  that  phase  which 
to  him  is  the  main  one,  that  though  they  translate 
Paul  correctly  they  do  not  properly  understand  him. 
Hence  he  guards  his  independence  even  over  against 
Erasmus  and  thus  by  drawing  upon  the  depths  of  his 
own  experience  for  the  first  time  he  solves  the  great 
problem  with  which  so  many  scholars  of  the  primitive 
and  the  mediaeval  church,  and  since  Marsilio  Ficino 
also  the  Humanists,  had  again  and  again  wi-estled 
in  vain. 

Luther  shows  what  Paul  really  felt,  thought  and 
taught.  Thereby  he  rediscovers  for  humanity  the 
great  Apostle  who  so  long  had  been  unsuccessfully 
courted.  Viewed  purely  as  a  scientific  achievement, 
therefore,  this  course  of  lectures  is  an  event  which  in 
the  history  of  exegesis  has  scarcely  been  equalled.  In 
these  lectures  the  wishes  of  the  Humanists  are  met  as 
well  as  the  aims  of  the  older  expounders  who  looked 
more  toward  an  appreciation  of  the  content.  But  the 
limitations  of  both  groups  have  been  recognized  and 
as  a  result  overcome  and  overtaken  scientifically. 


48  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

While  advancing  in  scholarship  the  young  monk 
in  these  first  years  of  his  instructorial  activity  also 
made  great  strides  as  a  teacher.  In  the  lectures  on 
Peter  Lombard,  Luther  seems  even  on  the  teaching 
platform  to  have  employed  altogether  the  cumber- 
some chancery  style  of  Scholasticism.  In  lecturing  on 
the  Psalms  he  occasionally  attempts  to  facilitate  the 
understanding  of  the  text  for  his  hearers  by  means  of 
similes,  comparisons,  examples  and  applications  to 
the  present.  Not  until  the  lectures  on  Romans, 
however,  does  this  tendency  so  dominate  his  entire 
exposition  that  from  his  notes  one  can  determine  not 
only  the  educational  level,  but  to  a  certain  degree  also 
the  interests  of  the  better  class  among  the  students  at 
Wittenberg. 

In  ever-recurring  digressions  Luther  expounds 
the  words  of  the  Apostle  through  striking  examples 
from  contemporary  life,  apt  similes,  fables  and  anec- 
dotes. Besides,  not  infrequently  we  find  him  also 
adducing  German  proverbs  in  order  to  render  the 
textual  meaning  clearer.  Above  all,  he  takes  care  by 
means  of  "able  translations"  of  difficult  Greek  and 
Latin  expressions  that  also  the  less  gifted  can  follow 
him.  In  order  that  no  one  may  spend  his  time  in  the 
lectures  altogether  without  profit  to  himself  Luther 
regularly  summarizes  the  essentials  in  a  brief  dicta- 
tion. Small  wonder,  therefore,  that  so  relatively 
large  a  number  of  transcripts  of  his  course  by  stu- 
dents have  been  preserved,  and  that  students  even  at 
this    early    date    "gladly,"    indeed    enthusiastically, 


STAGES  IN  LUTHER'S  CONVERSION  49 

entered  his  classes.  For  once  they  enjoyed  the  rare 
good  luck  of  learning  something  really  new  in  a 
course  of  lectures.  At  the  same  time  this  new  mate- 
rial was  presented  to  them  in  such  a  comprehensible 
and  clear,  and  in  so  captivating  and  interesting  a 
manner  that  even  a  dull  person  needed  only  to  stretch 
forth  his  hand  in  order  to  make  it  his  lasting  posses- 
sion. 

It  is  more  noteworthy  still  for  us  to-day  to  observe 
how  early  the  temperament  and  critical  vein  of  his 
later  fighting  years  becomes  evident  in  the  Reformer. 
In  the  earliest  manuscript  notes  from  his  hand  which 
we  possess,  in  a  marginal  gloss  of  the  years  1508-09 
to  the  works  of  St.  Augustine,  he  manifests  his 
enthusiasm  for  this  author  quite  in  the  passionate 
manner  of  his  later  life,  while  at  the  same  time  he 
shows  his  aversion  for  the  prince  of  mediaeval  philoso- 
phy, Aristotle.  Simultaneously  he  begins  to  look 
upon  tradition  with  critical  eyes.  For  example,  he 
closely  compares  the  content  and  style  of  the  writings 
in  the  Basel  edition  of  Augustine  and  with  happy 
penetration  stamps  two  of  them  as  spurious. 

Soon  after  in  his  studies  on  the  Psalms  he  began  to 
risk  strictures  on  conditions  in  the  church  of  his  time. 
His  sympathy  for  such  matters  is,  however,  not  yet 
very  active.  His  interests  remain  chiefly  centered 
in  scholarly  investigation  and  on  practical  questions 
of  edification.  Only  in  his  lectures  on  Romans  does 
his  participation  in  the  happenings  of  the  world  out- 
side of  the  monastery  walls  become  visible.  He  refers 
with   increasing   frequency   to   events   of   the   day. 


50     LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

With  growing  energy  he  points  out  evils  in  the 
Church  and  in  secular  society,  ever  more  briskly, 
openly  and  audaciously  he  expresses  his  displeasure, 
sorrow  and  indignation.  Though  he  does  not  cen- 
sure indulgences  as  such,  he  yet  finds  fault  with  their 
excessive  number  and  with  the  greedy  and  cruel 
methods  of  the  givers  of  indulgences.  He  does  not 
object  to  fasting  in  itself  but  condemns  compulsory 
fasts,  nor  does  he  oppose  the  cult  of  the  saints  as 
such  but  he  rejects  the  superstitious  out-growths  of 
saint  worship.  He  openly  asserts  that  canon  law 
needs  a  thorough  cleansing,  that  public  worship 
requires  a  decided  purging  of  superfluous  ceremonies 
and  tenets  and  that  the  number  of  festal  days  ought 
to  be  materially  reduced.  He  states  that  for  money 
dispensation  from  all  obligations  is  granted  at  Rome 
and  that  the  new  Rome  is  worse  than  the  old.  He 
loudly  complains  about  the  hardness  and  violence, 
effeminacy  and  unspiritual  attitude  of  the  ecclesiasti- 
cal princes,  the  crudeness  and  inadequate  education 
of  the  parish  priests,  the  arrogance  of  the  monks,  the 
imprudence  of  the  indulgence  preachers,  the  super- 
stitious regard  paid  to  foundations  for  masses,  the 
laziness  of  the  craftsmen,  the  selfishness,  dogmatism 
and  cruelty  of  the  secular  princes,  the  perverse  stu- 
pidity, superficiality  and  irreligion  of  the  jurists. 
Indeed,  he  is  well-nigh  as  opposed  to  this  latter  group 
as  he  is  in  later  years.  Greater,  however,  is  his  aver- 
sion for  the  "hog  theologians,"  i.  e.,  the  Scholastics 
and  Scholastic  philosophers.  He  has  so  completely 
done  with  both  of  these  that  he  openly  advises  his  stu- 


STAGES  IN  LUTHER'S  CONVERSION  51 

dents  to  absolve  the  required  courses  in  philosophy  as 
quickly  as  possible  and  then  promptly  to  begin  the 
attack  upon  philosophy,  that  is,  upon  Scholasti- 
cism. 

Luther  is  by  no  means  always  content  with  such 
covert  and  general  judgments.  He  is  not  afraid  to 
mention  by  name,  or  at  least  clearly  to  specify  indi- 
vidual sinners  in  high  position  so  that  every  attentive 
auditor  knew  at  once  who  was  meant.  Thus,  for 
instance,  he  speaks  of  Pope  Julius  II.,  Duke  George 
of  Saxony,  the  Bishop  of  Strassburg  and  even  his 
own  ruler,  the  Elector  Frederick  the  Wise  whom 
otherwise  he  held  in  sincere  regard.  His  criticisms 
always  spring  from  disappointed  love,  never  from  a 
mere  habit  of  fault-finding.  Full  of  honest  loyalty 
to  his  Elector  he  also  clings  to  the  Church  with  his 
whole  soul.  He  still  loves  and  honors  it  as  his  mother, 
still  deems  it  self-evident  that  priests  ought  to  be 
reverenced,  in  spite  of  the  many  bad  elements  among 
the  clergy,  and  ardently  pleads  that  people  ought  for 
love  of  the  Church  punctually  to  observe  also  those 
external  ceremonies  and  ordinances  which  it  had  im- 
posed on  the  faithful.  Monasticism  remains  so  high 
in  his  regard  that  he  endeavors  to  prove  to  his  audi- 
ence that  now  when  the  orders  were  so  despised  it  is 
more  than  ever  a  duty  to  become  a  monk. 

Nevertheless,  in  the  last  chapters  of  these  lectures 
one  always  has  the  feeling  that  he  himself  is  already 
at  the  point  of  discarding  the  cowl.  For  no  matter 
how  monkish  his  utterances  occasionally  still  sound, 
he  has  ceased  to  solely  turn  his  gaze  inward  and  up- 


52     LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

ward  as  a  true  monk,  he  has  begun  to  look  about 
himself  freely  and  with  clear  eyes.  His  strictures 
are  no  more  after  the  manner  of  a  monk  directed 
alone  upon  himself,  he  criticizes  the  whole  world. 
He  is  no  more  desirous  in  the  true  monastic  spirit  to 
reform  merely  himself,  he  has  a  complete  programme 
of  regeneration  both  for  the  Church  and  for  Chris- 
tian society  as  a  whole. 

This  broadening  of  his  intellectual  horizon,  this 
change  of  sentiment,  indeed  of  his  whole  point  of 
view  in  life,  is  so  striking  as  to  elicit  the  involuntary 
question:  What  has  made  the  young  monk  so  clear- 
sighted, fresh,  courageous,  in  fact  audacious  in  the 
course  of  a  few  years?  Was  this  change  due  merely 
to  a  growing  familiarity  with  the  dual  calling  of  pro- 
fessor and  preacher  which  had  been  forced  upon  him 
and  the  greater  inner  confidence  on  cathedra  and  pul- 
pit resulting  therefrom?  Were  this  true,  it  would  be 
impossible  to  understand  why  this  natural  develop- 
ment expressed  itself  in  a  growing  opposition  to 
precisely  those  authorities  which  as  professor  and 
preacher  he  was  officially  held  to  respect.  The  causes 
of  this  change  must  therefore  lie  deeper.  Somehow 
a  transformation  in  his  convictions  must  have  oc- 
curred in  his  first  years  as  instructor,  a  change  which 
gradually  evinced  itself  in  his  speech  and  actions,  so 
that  more  and  more  he  appeared  a  different  person 
even  to  those  who  knew  him  less  intimately. 

If  we  address  our  request  for  enlightenment  to  the 
latest  biographer  of  Luther,  Hartmann  Grisar,  S.  J. 
we  are  given  what  seems  a  very  simple  "psychological" 


STAGES  IN  LUTHER'S  CONVERSION  53 

explanation  of  the  above-mentioned  facts.  He  tells 
us  that  at  the  beginning  Luther  professed  the  views 
of  the  strict,  indeed  the  strictest  group  among  the 
Augustinian  Eremites.  For  this  reason  Grisar  fur- 
ther contends  Luther  was  sent  to  Rome  as  their  advo- 
cate when  Staupitz  got  into  a  quarrel  with  seven  mon- 
asteries who  were  zealous  for  the  maintenance  of  the 
rules  of  the  order.  And  how  does  Luther  in  reality 
make  use  of  this  trip  to  Rome?  In  the  first  place  he 
learns  Hebrew  from  the  Jew  Jacob,  secondly,  he 
hands  in  a  supplication  to  the  Curia  asking  leave  to 
remain  away  from  the  monastery  for  ten  years  so 
that  he  might  don  secular  dress  and  study  in  Italy. 
The  Curia,  however,  refused  him  this  permission. 
Brother  Martin  willy-nilly  had  to  return  to  Ger- 
many, and  there  he  then  tried  indirectly  to  gain  his 
desired  object.  As  a  first  step  to  this  end  "he 
deserted  to  his  friend  Staupitz,"  that  is,  he  now  sud- 
denly opposed  the  seven  Observantist  monasteries 
whose  cause  he  had  up  to  this  time  championed  with 
such  vehemence.  Thereupon  with  increasing  open- 
ness and  regardlessness  he  attacked  the  Observantists 
in  pulpit  and  platform  and  after  1515  as  district 
vicar  endeavored  with  all  means  in  his  power  to  gain 
control  for  "the  liberal  party  within  the  order 
which  was  devoted  to  him,"  in  the  ten  or  eleven 
monasteries  under  his  jurisdiction.  In  the  Black 
Cloister  at  Wittenberg  where  he  held  full  sway  no 
true  monastic  discipline  obtained  as  early  as  the 
beginning  of  the  year  1517  according  to  his  own  words, 
and  he  himself  had  long  ago  become  a  monk  "of  liberal 


54     LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

views  and  practice."  Therefore  these  critical  state- 
ments in  the  lectures  on  Romans  merely  reflect  the 
progressive  desertion  of  the  young  professor  from  the 
old  faith  for  which  he  had  had  no  real  inner  sympathy 
ever  since  1510,  in  fact  really  not  since  the  celebration 
of  his  first  mass  on  the  second  of  May,  1507,  as  his 
aversion  to  the  reading  of  masses  shows. 

This  is  a  rather  surprising  psychological  explana- 
tion. We  therefore  justly  inquire:  How  does  the 
learned  father  know  all  this?  His  chief  witness  is  a 
chronicler  from  lower  Saxony,  Jan  Oldekop  of  Hil- 
desheim,  who  in  1515-16  had  heard  Luther,  but  did 
not  find  time  to  put  his  thoughts  and  reminiscences  to 
paper  until  the  last  years  of  his  life  beginning  1561. 
This  man  who  hates  Doctor  Martin  so  bitterly  that 
he  flatly  holds  him  responsible  for  all  the  mischief 
and  disorder  of  the  time,  even  for  the  custom  of  wear- 
ing trunk  breeches  and  the  rise  in  the  price  of  bread, 
butter,  cheese  and  eggs  is  the  only  one  of  the  innu- 
merable opponents  and  enemies  of  Luther  who  relates 
the  neat  little  yarn  about  the  Jew  Jacob  and  about 
the  petition  to  the  Holy  See.  Unfortunately,  he  is  not 
an  unobjectionable  authority.  We  can  prove,  that 
especially  in  Rome,  Oldekop  permitted  himself  to  be 
duped  outrageously.  More  serious  still  is  the  fact 
that  he  occasionally  slights  the  truth  with  great  uncon- 
cern. Displaying  the  greatest  honesty  and  without 
batting  an  eye,  in  the  style  of  an  honest  old  tar  he 
relates  events  as  personal  experiences  which  he  never 
can  have  experienced,  because  they  never  took  place. 
Consequently,  he  must  be  given  credence  only  as  far 


STAGES  IN  LUTHER'S  CONVERSION  55 

as  other  witnesses  confirm  his  testimony.  Where  this 
is  not  the  case,  where,  in  fact,  he  conflicts  with  trust- 
worthy authorities  of  his  own  party  hke  John  Coch- 
laeus,  we  must  always  count  with  the  possibility  that 
he  is  indulging  a  little  in  fibbery  or  is  lying  outright. 

This  witness  is  therefore  worthless.  With  his 
other  proofs  the  learned  father  also  cannot  make  a 
great  showing.  His  method  of  dealing  with  the 
monk  Luther  reminds  one  of  the  manner  of  an  am- 
bitious young  lawyer  who  is  preparing  to  be  state's 
attorney  and  of  his  treatment  of  the  accused  who  are 
brought  before  him.  He  does  not  listen  carefully  to 
what  his  defendant  is  saying,  very  important  deposi- 
tions he  fails  to  hear  at  all,  while  step  by  step  he 
cross-examines  into  his  victim  just  those  things  he 
wishes  to  hear  from  him.  If  we  try  to  avoid  this  little 
blunder  and  to  determine  what  the  Reformer  and  the 
other  credible  witnesses  actually  say,  what  picture 
do  we  get  of  Luther's  development? 

In  the  first  place  it  is  true  that  a  conflict  occurred  in 
the  German  Congregation  of  the  Augustinians  to 
which  Luther  belonged.  The  cause  of  the  trouble 
was  an  attempt  by  Staupitz,  the  Vicar  General,  to 
unite  with  the  Congregation  twenty-five  non-re- 
formed Augustinian  houses.  The  purpose  of  Staupitz, 
of  course,  was  to  thus  gradually  reform  these  monas- 
teries also.  Since  the  General  of  the  Augustinians 
in  the  Spring  of  1510  consented  to  the  plan,  every- 
thing seemed  to  be  in  the  best  of  order  when,  just  at 
the  crucial  moment,  seven  of  the  thirty-one  members 
of  the  Congregation  protested  against  the  proposed 


56  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

union.  Among  the  protestants  were  the  two  large 
and  influential  convents  at  Erfurt  and  Niirnberg. 
Whether  this  opposition  was  very  wise  may  be  hon- 
estly doubted.  However  this  may  be,  the  seven  feared 
for  the  continuance  of  the  observances  and  therefore 
sent  two  brothers  to  Rome  before  the  end  of  1510 
there  to  register  their  protest  before  the  constituted 
authorities,  in  accordance  with  the  explicit  permis- 
sion in  the  statutes  of  the  order.  One  of  the  envoys 
was  the  Erfurt  monk  Martin  Luther,  though  mani- 
festly he  was  not  chosen  as  spokesman.  He  was  alto- 
gether too  young  for  that  task ;  besides,  and  this  was 
the  most  important  prerequisite,  he  did  not  know  how 
to  pull  the  wires  at  Rome.  As  was  to  be  expected, 
the  embassy  met  with  a  rebuff.  The  procurator  of  the 
order,  acting  wholly  within  his  rights,  refused  even  to 
allow  an  appeal  to  the  Curia. 

Nevertheless,  the  stay  of  four  weeks  in  the  Eternal 
City  did  not  remain  without  fruit  and  blessing  for  the 
monk  Luther.  In  the  first  place  he  made  a  general 
confession,  though  he  had  twice  done  so  before  in 
Erfurt.  Thereupon  he  undertook  the  difficult  pil- 
grimage to  the  seven  principal  churches  which  con- 
sumed a  whole  day,  but  was  rewarded  with  abundant 
indulgences.  Finally,  he  in  accordance  with  the  direc- 
tions prayerfully  ascended  the  Scala  Santa  of  the 
Lateran  on  his  knees,  and  like  a  '^mad  saint"  visited 
all  churches  and  catacombs  in  which  a  miracle-work- 
ing picture  or  relic  was  to  be  seen,  or  any  indulgence, 
great  or  small,  to  be  obtained.  All  this  he  did  in  com- 
mon with  other  pilgrims  to  Rome.    Otherwise  he  un- 


STAGES  IN  LUTHER'S  CONVERSION  57 

dertook  or  experienced  nothing  peculiar.  He  saw 
and  heard,  as  all  pilgrims  did,  a  number  of  things 
about  the  unholy  Rome  of  his  day,  but  these  impres- 
sions in  his  case  also  were  not  strong  enough  to  eradi- 
cate the  reminiscence  of  the  sacred  Rome  of  the  apos- 
tles and  martyrs  and  to  shake  his  faith  in  the  grandeur 
of  the  Catholic  Church. 

Meanwhile  the  General  of  the  Order  had  taken 
steps  to  settle  the  conflict  within  the  German  Congre- 
gation. Staupitz  entered  into  his  plans  without  op- 
position. About  the  middle  of  June,  1511,  in  a  con- 
ference with  the  priors  of  the  seven  protesting  mon- 
asteries at  Jena  he  declared  his  willingness  to  recede 
from  the  main  point  of  his  project,  the  union  into  one 
chapter  of  the  thirty-one  old  Observantist  monasteries 
with  the  twenty-five  newly  added  convents.  But  the 
success  which  had  been  hoped  for  did  not  materialize. 
Only  a  few  of  the  protesting  monks,  among  them 
Luther,  were  satisfied  and  joined  his  side.  What  now 
was  the  next  move  of  Staupitz?  At  the  meeting  of 
the  chapter  at  Cologne,  in  May,  1512,  he  simply 
dropped  his  whole  plan  of  union,  while  in  return  it 
seems  the  Niirnberg  convent  assumed  the  very  con- 
siderable expenses  of  the  conflict. 

Thereby  the  difference  was  ended  and  forgotten. 
It  is  clear  from  the  foregoing  that  the  whole  contro- 
versy was  not  one  about  principles  of  monastic  dis- 
cipline, but  about  purely  practical,  almost  political 
questions  over  which  divided  opinions,  in  spite  of  com- 
plete agreement  on  monastic  principles,  were  quite 
possible.    But  did  not  Luther  probably  later  on  make 


58     LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

out  of  a  squabble  over  matters  of  organization  one 
about  principial  issues?  By  no  means.  True,  the  nego- 
tiations of  the  summer  of  1511  had  for  him  personally 
a  very  important  consequence.  Because  at  Erfurt  he 
had  championed  the  cause  of  peace  and  probably  for 
this  reason,  as  a  black  sheep,  was  treated  badly  by 
his  brothers  in  the  convent  he  was,  possibly  in  the  late 
summer  of  1511,  recalled  to  Wittenberg  by  Staupitz, 
and  in  October,  1512,  through  the  influence  of  his 
patron,  given  the  professorship  for  Old  and  New  Tes- 
tament Theology  vacated  by  Staupitz.  This  un- 
doubtedly for  Luther  and  for  mankind  constituted 
the  most  important  result  of  the  whole  controversy. 
That  Wittenberg  became  the  forum,  and  Electoral 
Saxony  the  outpost,  of  the  Reformation,  and  what- 
ever else  resulted  therefrom  for  Saxony  as  well  as  for 
the  Reformation,  is  indirectly  connected  with  this 
event  which  to  none  of  those  implicated  seemed  to  be 
of  sufficient  importance  to  even  once  mention  it  in 
passing.  Indeed,  the  Reformer  Luther  did  not  exist 
at  this  time,  only  Luther  the  Professor.  As  such 
Luther  for  the  present  did  only  what  all  professors 
of  theology  have  always  done,  he  gave  lectures  and 
occasionally  besides  preached  sermons  distinctly  pro- 
fessorial in  tone. 

In  the  course  of  these  lectures,  which  were  heard 
also  by  many  young  Augustinians  he  twice,  in  passing, 
criticizes  the  attitude  of  the  opposing  monasteries 
toward  Staupitz  in  the  recent  fight  on  unification. 
Also  on  occasion  he  attacks  certain  excrescences  of 
monastic  life  which  showed  themselves  not  only  among 


STAGES  IN  LUTHER'S  CONVERSION  59 

the  Augustinians  but  in  all  orders.  Finally,  exactly 
as  the  Italian  and  Spanish  bishops  at  the  Lateran 
Council  of  the  same  time,  he  once  discusses  the  scru- 
ples which  had  arisen  among  Catholics  about  the  ex- 
cessive privileges  of  the  mendicant  orders,  doubts 
which  were  fully  justified.  In  all  these  utterances, 
however,  we  have  to  deal  with  mere  doubts  and  criti- 
cisms of  actual  conditions,  never  with  opposition  in 
principle  to  the  organization  of  which  he  himself  was 
a  member.  His  fellow  Augustinians  fully  recognized 
this  fact.  They  saw  in  this  occasional  criticism  no 
more  than  "a  holy  zeal  for  the  house  of  the  Lord,"  and 
therefore,  in  May,  1515,  elected  him  district  vicar  at 
the  chapter  convened  at  Gotha,  right  after  one  of  these 
criticizing  speeches. 

Did  he  as  vicar  subsequently  endeavor  to  place  in 
control  in  the  monasteries  subject  to  him  "the  liberal 
party  in  the  order  which  was  devoted  to  him?"  The 
answer  to  this  is  simply  that  there  was  no  such  party. 
What  we  know  about  his  activity  as  vicar,  and  it  is  not 
so  very  little,  merely  proves  that  he  was  attempting 
on  the  basis  of  the  statutes  to  maintain  or  re-establish 
order  in  the  convents.  But  why  did  he  not  make  a 
beginning  in  Wittenberg  itself,  where  by  his  own  ad- 
mission at  the  opening  of  1517  a  true  monastic  order 
of  life  had  ceased  to  exist?  Does  he  really  admit  this ? 
No.  What  modern  inquirers  call  disorder  was  the 
normal  order  of  things  in  all  the  monasteries  of  the 
province  with  the  exception  of  Erfurt,  namely,  the 
monks  did  not  chant  high  mass,  did  not  sing  the  mo- 
nastic hours,  but  merely  recited  them  recto  tono.    As 


60  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

far  as  possible  they  concentrated  the  hours,  etc.,  that 
they  might  have  the  necessary  time  for  other  matters 
which  seemed  of  more  importance  to  them,  namely, 
pastoral  care,  preaching  and  study — these  being  "the 
rites  and  regulations"  mentioned  in  the  now  almost 
famous  confession. 

Thus  nothing  is  left  of  "the  monk  of  liberal  views 
and  practice"  except  a  complaint  made  by  the  Re- 
former in  October,  1516:  "Seldom  do  I  get  the  requi- 
site time  to  pray  the  hours  and  to  celebrate  the  mass." 
Upon  these  words  people  immediately  but  wrongly, 
"with  calculated  tactics" — to  use  a  favorite  phrase  of 
modern  "Luther  psychologists" — based  the  accusa- 
tion :  therefore  he  even  neglected  to  perform  his  hours 
and  read  a  daily  mass  in  obedience  to  the  rules.  Fur- 
thermore, there  remains  the  fact  that  the  Reformer 
after  the  opening  of  the  public  conflict,  that  is,  after 
the  thirty-first  of  October,  1517,  frequently  was  un- 
able for  two,  even  three  weeks  to  read  the  prayers 
of  the  breviary,  and  that  he  therefore  occasionally  on 
Saturday  locked  himself  in  for  three  days  without 
partaking  of  food  or  drink  in  order  that  he  might 
make  up  at  one  sitting  what  he  had  missed. 

The  psychological  exposition  of  Father  Grisar 
therefore  unfortunately  does  not  lead  us  to  the  goal. 
Hence  let  us  turn  to  another  interpreter  of  the  soul 
of  Luther  who  is  perchance  better  acquainted  with 
its  depths  and  shallows  than  the  learned  Jesuit,  since, 
to  use  an  adage,  "he  was  next  to  it,"  namely.  Doctor 
Luther  himself.  It  is  well  known  that  he  ever  wore 
his  heart  upon  his  sleeve.    We  therefore  do  not  expect 


STAGES  IN  LUTHER'S  CONVERSION  61 

him  to  carefully  conceal  what  agitated  his  soul  dur- 
ing his  sojourn  in  the  Babylonian  Captivity  of  the 
"Papacy." 

Quite  to  the  contrary!  He  often  and  gladly  told 
why  once  upon  a  time  he  had  entered  the  monastery 
and  what  brought  him  out  again.  Indeed,  once  at 
the  end  of  his  life,  in  the  historical  introduction  to  the 
first  volume  of  his  complete  works  on  the  fifth  of 
March,  1545,  he  made  an  attempt  at  a  formal  auto- 
biography. This  effort  can  hardly  be  termed  a  suc- 
cess from  the  point  of  view  of  form.  Like  so  many 
old  people — even  aged  professors — he  continually 
goes  off  at  a  tangent  while  narrating  his  story;  one 
incident  always  suggests  to  him  another  which  he  has 
passed  over. 

Luther  begins  with  the  publication  of  the  Theses 
on  the  thirty-first  of  October,  1517,  as  present-day 
writers  are  still  doing  and  thereupon  deinceps  secun- 
dum ordinem  reports  on  the  events  up  to  the  debate 
at  Leipzig  in  July,  1519.  Having  arrived  at  this 
point  without  accident  he  suddenly  remembers  that  he 
has  not  said  a  word  about  the  famous  golden  rose  and 
the  even  more  significant  affair  with  Miltitz.  Directly 
he  sets  about  making  up  thoroughly  for  this  neglect, 
and  then  continues  in  a  languid  narrative  strain:  "In 
the  same  year,  1519,  I  had  for  the  second  time  under- 
taken the  commentary  on  the  Psalms,  confident  that 
I  now  possessed  greater  practice  after  having  mean- 
while in  lectures  dealt  with  the  Epistles  of  Paul  to 
the  Romans,  Galatians  and  Hebrews."  Barely  had 
he  written  the  word  "Romans"  when  suddenly  and 


62     LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

powerfully  there  stood  oefore  his  soul  all  that  he 
owed  to  this  epistle.  Forthwith  he  turns  back  a  few 
years  in  the  course  of  events  and  writes  a  whole  page 
about  his  initial  and  decisive  encounter  with  the  Epis- 
tle to  the  Romans.  After  ten  sentences  he  then  again 
resumes  the  narrative  with  the  words:  "Better  pre- 
pared by  such  thoughts  I  began  for  the  second  time 
to  expound  the  Psalms,"  whereupon  he  quickly  con- 
cludes the  whole  with  a  single  statement  about  the 
Diet  of  Worms. 

Anyone  who  has  associated  much  with  old  people 
will  not  be  surprised  at  this  somewhat  disorderly  ac- 
count by  the  aged  Reformer.  Much  less  will  such  a 
person  be  amazed  about  the  fact  that  the  old  man  says 
the  most  important  and  interesting  things  in  a  digres- 
sion. That  occurs  frequently,  especially  with  old  pro- 
fessors. The  most  significant  and  interesting  parts  of 
his  story  are  naturally  the  ten  sentences  about  his 
first  meeting  with  the  Apostle  Paul.  Luther  says  in 
his  narrative  that  he  had  felt  a  strange  longing  to 
know  the  Apostle,  but  one  thing  had  always  made 
him  shrink  back  again,  "the  righteousness  of  God," 
in  the  seventeenth  verse  of  the  very  first  chapter  of 
the  Epistle  to  the  Romans.  Luther  says  that  he  had 
been  in  the  habit  of  explaining  this  concept  in  the  man- 
ner of  the  philosophers,  that  is,  to  understand  it  as  hav- 
ing reference  to  the  punishing  and  rewarding  right- 
eousness of  God,  and  that  he  had  concluded  there- 
from that  God  in  the  gospel  also  revealed  himself  only 
as  a  merciless  and  angry  judge.  For  this  God  of  ven- 
geance and  judgment  who  already  by  the  law  of  the 


STAGES  IN  LUTHER'S  CONVERSION  63 

Old  Covenant  had  entangled  mankind  in  all  manner 
of  misery  he  had  felt  a  downright  hatred.  After  days 
and  nights  of  meditation  he  claims  that  the  idea  once 
struck  him  to  compare  these  words  with  the  following 
sentence:  "The  just  shall  live  by  faith."  And  sud- 
denly the  meaning  of  the  words  of  the  Apostle  had 
become  clear  to  him.  Not  the  punishing  and  reward- 
ing righteousness  of  God  was  meant,  but  the  right- 
eousness which  absolves  through  grace.  Directly  he 
had  felt  as  though  the  gates  of  paradise  had  opened 
wide  before  him.  The  Reformer  relates  how  a  short 
while  later  he  read  the  treatise  by  Augustine  "About 
the  Spirit  and  the  Letter,"  and  how  he  there  found,  if 
not  exactly  the  same,  at  least  a  very  similar  exposition 
of  the  words  which  to  him  now  had  become  the  door 
to  paradise. 

The  very  same  story  is  told  by  Luther  repeatedly  in 
earlier  years.  Indeed,  he  adds  a  few  interesting  sup- 
plementary details  in  these  other  mentions  of  the  fact. 
In  a  sermon  he  once  says:  "When  I  was  made  a  Doc- 
tor (18-19  of  October,  1512)  I  did  not  yet  know  the 
light."  (Weimar  edition,  vol.  45,  p.  86.)  Substan- 
tially in  agreement  with  this  statement  he  says  on 
another  occasion  during  conversation  at  supper:  "In 
this  tower — ^that  is,  in  the  Black  Cloister  at  Witten- 
berg— ^the  Holy  Spirit  gave  me  this  understanding." 

Can  we  without  further  inquiry  accept  this  testi- 
mony on  faith?  From  a  marginal  note  which  the  young 
monk  in  the  year  1509-10,  at  Erfurt,  made  in  his  copy 
of  Peter  Lombard,  we  perceive  that  even  then  he  was 
at  one  time  engaged  upon  Romans  1 :17,  and  had  in- 


64     LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

deed  referred  to  a  commentary  m  which  the  words 
"the  righteousness  of  God"  are,  if  not  correctly,  cer- 
tainly not  wrongly  and  "philosophically"  interpreted, 
as  Luther  himself  according  to  his  own  words  still  un- 
derstands them  in  1512.  It  is  true,  he  did  not  consult 
the  commentary  for  the  sake  of  these  words  but  with 
an  eye  to  the  following  phrase:  "from  faith  to  faith." 
We  must,  therefore,  grant  that  at  this  time  he  over- 
looked this  first  passage,  as  is  likely  to  happen  when 
one  seeks  for  a  definite  expression  in  a  bulky  volume 
in  the  nature  of  a  dictionary. 

Another  observation  is  more  suspicious  at  least 
upon  first  impression.  In  the  introduction  just 
quoted  he  seems  to  claim  that  all  expounders  with  the 
exception  of  Augustine  had  explained  the  righteous- 
ness of  God  in  this  passage  of  the  first  chapter  of 
Romans  "philosophically."  In  fact,  in  his  lectures  on 
Genesis  of  the  year  1511-12  this  charge  is  literally 
made.  (Weimar  edition,  vol.  43,  p.  537.)  These  lec- 
tures, however,  he  did  not  personally  write  down  and 
publish.  The  part  in  question  was  not  made  public 
until  long  after  his  death  and  is  based  upon  the  not 
always  legible  notes  of  one  of  his  students.  Besides, 
the  publishers  showed  no  scruples  in  making  all  sorts 
of  additions  ui^on  their  own  responsibility  even  in  the 
sections  published  during  his  lifetime.  ( See  Weimar 
edition,  vol.  42,  pp.  213  and  357.)  Nevertheless, 
Luther  must  have  made  a  similar  statement  at  some 
time.  How  otherwise  could  INIelanchthon  in  his  fa- 
mous "Life  of  Luther"  of  the  first  of  June,  1546,  di- 
rectly assert  the  identical  thing?     Let  us  therefore 


STAGES  IN  LUTHER'S  CONVERSION  65 

calmly  assume  that  this  assertion  goes  back  to  an  ut- 
terance made  by  Luther  himself.  What  would  be  the 
result?  That  he  made  a  mistake  in  this  introduction. 
For  what  he  says  in  it  about  the  exegesis  of  the  Epistle 
to  the  Romans  has  been  proven  to  be  false. 

However,  is  the  designation  "mistake"  perhaps  not 
too  mild?  If  we  read  the  later  reports  and  verdicts 
of  the  Reformer  about  his  life  in  the  monastery  we 
might  easily  be  led  to  the  belief  that  not  for  one  hour 
did  he  feel  happy  and  content  in  the  cowl.  On  the 
other  hand,  he  relates  that  when  celebrating  his  first 
mass  on  the  second  of  May,  1507,  he  praised  the  life 
in  the  monastery  to  his  father  as  fine,  peaceful  and 
godly,  and  also  that  during  his  stay  in  the  convent  he 
had  experienced  hours  of  mystic  exaltation  like  a 
proud  saint,  during  which  he  imagined  himself  among 
choirs  of  angels.  Is  not  this  an  intolerable  contradic- 
tion? Not  in  the  least.  Indeed,  it  is  but  another 
proof  for  the  old  psychological  truth  that  with  men  of 
hypochondriac  temperament  the  remembrance  of 
struggles,  anxiety,  distress  and  disappointments 
through  which  they  have  passed  impresses  itself  much 
more  vividly  upon  the  soul  than  the  remembrance  of 
happy  hours,  which  after  all  are  not  lacking  even  in 
the  most  miserable  and  sorrowful  existence. 

Even  so,  however,  the  details  of  the  stories,  espe- 
cially such  as  he  personally  told  some  of  his  compan- 
ions as  a  sort  of  relish  or  dessert  at  the  supper-table 
in  the  Black  Cloister,  are  not  always  wholly  correct. 
Occasionally  he  is  mistaken  in  the  matter  of  dates,  at 
times  he  errs  also  in  points  of  fact.    On  the  other  hand, 


66     LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

we  must  guard  against  drawing  too  far-reaching  con- 
clusions from  minor  contradictions.  If,  for  example, 
he  at  one  time  says :  I  was  born  in  1483,  and  at  another 
time  gives  the  date  1484 ;  if  once  he  refers  to  Eisleben 
as  the  place  of  his  birth,  and  then  again  says  that  it 
was  Mansfeld,  this  only  proves  that  he,  as  so  many 
people  of  his  day,  did  not  know  the  facts  exactly.  Even 
the  person  who  could  most  readily  have  given  infor- 
mation on  this  subject,  his  good  mother,  had,  as  we 
are  in  a  position  to  prove,  entirely  forgotten  the  year 
though  not  the  place  of  birth  of  her  son  Martin.  Nev- 
ertheless, these  little  contradictions,  uncertainties  and 
errors  make  it  our  duty  in  every  case  closely  to  ex- 
amine his  reminiscences  and  communications,  and 
never  to  let  them  pass  without  scrutiny  or  investiga- 
tion. 

Is  this  sufficient?  Some  scholars  say  no.  Who  errs 
once  is  not  worthy  of  credence,  even  if  he  speak  the 
truth.  All  these  stories  about  his  life  in  the  convent 
and  under  the  Papacy,  they  aver,  are  legends  and 
originated  in  the  third  decade  of  the  sixteenth  century. 
Moreover,  they  claim  that  they  are  "lies"  (Legende: 
Luegende),  intentional  falsehoods  calculated  to  glo- 
rify his  own  person,  a  romance  gotten  up  later  in  order 
to  defame  the  religious  orders  of  the  Catholic  Church. 
Undoubtedly  this  is  but  another  instance  of  a  very 
simple  "psychological"  explanation  of  the  facts.  Is 
such  an  interpretation  on  the  other  hand  necessary, 
likely,  or  even  possible?  It  would  be  had  Luther  else- 
where also  been  in  the  habit  of  lying  without  any 
sense  or  object,  hke  an  hysterical  woman.    For  it  is 


STAGES  IN  LUTHER'S  CONVERSION  67 

absolutely  impossible  to  see  what  "advantage"  or  pur- 
pose these  utility  lies  which  are  so  often  told  in  com- 
plete agreement  with  one  another  and  are  in  the  com- 
mon sense  of  the  word  altogether  uninteresting  should 
have  served.  Again,  this  view  would  be  possible  if 
the  Reformer  had  really  not  begun  to  tell  of  the  strug- 
gles of  his  soul,  his  doubts  and  pangs  of  conscience 
until  1530,  as  Denifle  claims.  This,  however,  is  not 
the  case.  As  early  as  1515,  years  before  his  breach 
with  the  old  Church,  the  monk  Luther  tells  his  pupils 
about  conflicts,  doubts  and  troubles  of  conscience  now 
happily  overcome.  Early  in  1516  he  declares  that 
once  he  knew  nothing  of  the  "righteousness  of  God," 
but  that  now,  though  not  without  internal  conflicts, 
he  had  come  to  understand  clearly  the  meaning  of  this 
term  in  Scriptures.  Almost  at  the  same  time  he  fur- 
ther confesses  that  he  actually  felt  "seasick"  whenever 
he  heard  anyone  use  the  word  "righteousness"  in  the 
strict  sense  of  the  law. 

It  follows  from  this  that  the  aged  Luther's  sup- 
posed "romance  of  the  convent"  is  in  its  essential  fea- 
tures quite  firmly  fixed  in  the  mind  of  the  Reformer  as 
early  as  1515  and  1516,  though  at  that  time  he  does 
not  yet  mention  self-castigation,  freezing,  wakeful 
nights  and  fasts.  But  of  these  things  his  cell  at  Erfurt 
and  his  oldest  portrait  speak  all  the  more  eloquently. 
His  room  in  the  monastery  had  no  arrangement  for 
heating,  so  he  really  did  suffer  from  cold  as  he  later 
asserts.  His  oldest  likeness  dates  from  the  year  1520. 
On  it  his  features  are  still  those  described  by  Mosellan 
in  July  of  the  previous  year.    He  looks  morbidly  tired, 


68     LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

with  sunken  eyes  and  hollow  cheeks  and  seems  mere 
skin  and  bones.  Hence  it  is  also  true  that  he  starved 
himself  and  otherwise  lived  like  an  assiduous  ascetic 
"in  waking,  praying  and  other  labors."  For  it  is 
quite  unlikely  that  a  healthy  and  robust  man  of  thirty- 
six — this  was  his  age  then — should  look  so  cadaverous 
if  he  be  in  the  least  careful  about  his  physical  well- 
being.  As  soon  as  Luther  took  the  trouble  to  pay  at- 
tention to  his  health  his  outward  appearance  began 
visibly  to  improve.  Evidence  of  this  is  his  next  pic- 
ture from  the  spring  of  1521.  In  it  the  hollow  cheeks 
and  eyes  have  become  filled  out,  the  bony  neck  is  round 
and  firm,  indeed,  the  first  signs  of  a  double  chin  are 
to  be  seen,  so  that  one  is  almost  led  to  believe  that 
meanwhile  the  ascetic  hermit  had  become  a  comfort- 
ably situated  prelate. 

While  thus  we  have  no  reason  whatsoever  to  im- 
pugn the  veracity  of  the  Reformer  in  this  respect,  are 
not  on  the  other  hand  the  blunders,  errors  and  exag- 
gerations in  his  statement  so  incriminating  that  we 
would  do  well  wholly  to  dispense  with  information 
given  by  him  in  his  later  years?  If  this  were  the  case 
we  would  be  forced  radically  to  discard  as  mere  idle 
prattle  well-nigh  all  memoirs  and  autobiographies 
and  absolutely  all  biographical  reminiscences  of  older 
people.  For  Luther  had  the  same  experience  as  all 
famous  writers  of  memoirs  who  were  not  in  a  position 
to  use  contemporary  documents  and  notes. 

Goethe  in  his  "Dichtung  und  Wahrheit"  not  only 
very  frequently  combines  facts  in  an  arbitrary  way, 
but  is  besides  guilty  of  the  gravest  errors  in  chronol- 


STAGES  IN  LUTHER'S  CONVERSION  69 

ogy,  especially  when  he  deals  with  the  date  of  origin 
of  his  works.  There  is  no  doubt,  however,  that  on 
these  questions  particularly  the  great  poet  wishes  to 
present  truth  and  not  poetry.  It  is  well  known  that 
Bismarck  in  his  "Gedanken  und  Erinnerungen" 
often  sets  down  mistaken  reminiscences  and  wrong 
thoughts.  Yet  no  one  would  for  a  minute  think  of 
branding  him  a  liar  because  of  this  or  refuse  to  accept 
his  memoirs  as  an  historical  source.  The  same  is  true 
of  all  such  works  in  modern  times,  no  matter  who  the 
author  may  be.  None  of  them  is  free  from  blunders 
and  errors,  yet  without  a  doubt  they  are  sources  which 
no  historian  dare  leave  unread.  Consequently,  no 
psychologist  will  be  surprised  about  these  errors  and 
contradictions  in  chronology  and  fact  in  the  remi- 
niscences of  the  aging  Luther.  At  most  he  will  wonder 
that  the  old  man  did  not  err  more  often.  For  Luther 
did  not  have  access  to  diaries  and  journals  like  Goethe, 
he  had  no  well-ordered  collection  of  materials  and  no 
expert  collaborator  like  Bismarck.  Above  all,  his 
stories  are  always  told  incidentally  and  mostly  by 
word  of  mouth  only,  without  long  previous  prepara- 
tion and  careful  testing  of  his  remembrance — alto- 
gether on  the  promptings  of  the  moment. 

Is  it  possible  in  this  way  to  explain  all  mistakes, 
all  exaggerated  and  unjust  verdicts  which  the  Re- 
former in  later  years  renders  about  the  "Papacy," 
that  is,  the  Catholic  Church  in  all  its  phases?  He 
makes  the  well-known  declaration  that  as  a  child  he 
knew  nothing  about  the  mercy  of  God  and  of  his 
grace,  and  that  he  became  acquainted  with  Christ 


70  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

only  in  the  capacity  of  an  angry  judge  of  the  world 
enthroned  upon  a  rainbow.  He  says  that  even  in  the 
monastery  he  still  hated  Christ,  so  that  he  was  fright- 
ened whenever  he  saw  a  painting  or  likeness  of  him, 
or  heard  his  name  mentioned  in  passing.  Indeed, 
here  especially  Luther  claims  to  have  suffered  the 
keenest  doubts  about  God's  mercy.  This  was  due, 
he  asserts,  not  merely  to  the  frailty  of  human  nature 
but  to  the  Pope's  theology.    Is  this  true? 

Upon  reading  the  beautiful  prayers  and  hymns 
which  Denifle  cites  from  the  breviary  and  missal  used 
by  the  Augustinian  hermits  one  is  tempted  at  the  first 
blush  to  join  him  in  his  negative  answer.  For  in  these 
prayers  and  hymns  we  everywhere  meet  not  the  angry 
judge  but  the  merciful  and  gracious  God  of  whom 
Luther  at  the  time  claims  to  have  been  ignorant.  Since 
then  it  can  be  proven  that  he  knew  these  books  thor- 
oughly, in  fact,  had  committed  a  goodly  portion  of 
their  contents  to  memory,  the  conclusion  seems  ima- 
voidable  that  all  his  later  stories  about  his  doubting 
the  mercy  of  God  are  pure  invention.  Luther  never 
sincerely  doubted  and  struggled.  It  was  impossible 
for  him  ever  to  fall  into  such  inner  conflicts  and  trou- 
bles, for  almost  hourly  and  daily  he  heard  that  very 
grace  praised  in  hymns  and  talked  about  in  the  most 
impressive  manner. 

True,  if  in  the  monastery  he  had  never  done  any- 
thing but  sing  and  pray,  hear  and  read  mass,  then  this 
conclusion  would  not  only  be  permissible  but  impera- 
tive, then  we  would  always  need  only  to  open  the 
missal  and  breviary  of  the  Augustinians  in  order  to 


STAGES  IN  LUTHER'S  CONVERSION  71 

determine  what  at  the  time  were  Luther's  behefs, 
hopes  and  fears.  However,  we  know  very  distinctly 
that  he  did  and  had  to  do  many  other  things  besides. 
Even  as  a  novice  he  read  and  became  acquainted  with 
the  Bible  and  a  few  mystic  and  theological  authors  in 
addition  to  the  missal  and  breviary.  Above  all,  it  was 
his  duty  to  memorize  the  rules  and  constitutions  of 
the  order,  and  to  accustom  himself  to  the  tremendous 
task  set  for  the  monk,  and  ever  new  from  day  to  day 
for  the  novice:  the  problem  of  subduing  his  old  self 
and  of  becoming  a  superman  after  the  monastic  ideal, 
that  is,  a  man  who,  free  and  rid  of  all  selfishness,  loves 
and  desires  God  alone.  This  task  demanded  his  whole 
force  of  will  and  action.  It  not  only  compelled  him 
to  submit  his  whole  outer  and  inner  life  completely 
to  the  control  and  training  of  the  master  of  novices, 
to  chastize  himself  and  to  take  upon  himself  all  sorts 
of  external  exercises  of  humility  and  obedience,  but 
also  constrained  him  to  continually  observe  himself, 
to  register  faithfully  every  sinful  thought  and  with 
all  his  might  to  "torment  and  torture,"  to  discipline 
and  train  his  soul,  so  that  gradually  it  might  be  cap- 
able of  the  high  art  of  loving  nothing  and  desiring 
nothing  but  God  alone. 

After  taking  the  vows  in  September,  1506,  a  new 
task  immediately  confronted  him  which  deeply  stirred 
his  soul :  the  duty  of  preparing  for  his  consecration  to 
the  priesthood.  Hardly  had  he  with  this  end  in  view 
thoroughly  and  with  a  "bleeding"  heart  studied  the 
prescribed  book  by  Gabriel  Biel  on  the  canon  of  the 
mass  and  received  holy  orders  (February,  1507)  when 


72     LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

his  superiors  again  imposed  upon  him  an  altogether 
new  duty.  Once  more  he  was  forced  to  become  a  pupil 
and  as  "cursor"  to  study  the  masters  of  "modern  the- 
ology," Okkam,  d'Ailly,  Gerson,  Biel  under  the 
teachers  of  the  order,  Paltz  and  Nathin.  This  he  ac- 
cordingly did  with  such  zeal  and  success  that  after 
autumn,  1508,  he  was  employed  as  instructor.  From 
that  time  on  naturally  his  days  were  more  than  ever 
given  to  study,  for  in  order  that  he  might  teach  well 
Luther  also  was  at  first  compelled  to  study  harder 
than  ever  before. 

All  these  facts  sufficiently  show  that  in  these  de- 
cisive years  his  soul  was  occupied  much  more  with 
numerous  other  matters  than  with  singing  and  pray- 
ing in  the  choir.  From  his  very  first  day  in  the  monas- 
tery he*  was  naturally  more  vitally  concerned  in  the 
great  life  question  of  his  new  state:  how  will  I  gain 
complete  freedom  from  the  natural  instincts  of  self- 
love  and  arrive  at  a  perfect  love  of  God?  Also  his 
attention  was  deeply  centered  upon  all  those  problems 
which  he  met  again  and  again  in  the  course  of  his 
studies.  For  they  were  most  intimately  connected 
with  this  practical  question  and  ever  again  forced  him 
to  the  closest  and  most  earnest  meditation.  Mean- 
while he  on  the  other  hand  increasingly  felt  the  daily 
hours  and  readings  of  the  breviary  to  be  "ass's  work," 
indeed  mere  sound,  drawl,  murmur  and  bleating  at 
the  walls,  which  made  one  feel  dull  in  the  head. 

If  therefore  we  wish  to  find  out  what  it  was  that 
engaged  his  inner  self  during  the  first  years  of  his 
sojourn  in  the  monastery,  we  must  not  have  recourse 


STAGES  IN  LUTHER'S  CONVERSION  73 

to  the  prayers  and  hymns  which  year  in  year  out  he 
read  and  recited  together  with  all  his  fellow  monks  ex- 
actly in  accordance  with  the  rule,  but  we  must  re- 
member also  the  high  and  strict  ideal  after  which  he 
then  endeavored  to  mould  his  outer  and  inner  life. 
We  must  besides  study  the  great  theologians  and 
edificatory  writers  whom  he  so  completely  followed 
at  the  time  that  he  read  even  the  Bible  through  their 
eyes,  men  like  Okkam  and  d'Ailly,  Gerson  and  Biel, 
Bernard  of  Clairvaux  and  Bonaventura,  John  Mau- 
burnus  and  Gerard  of  Zuetphen.  Only  thus  will  we 
be  able  to  determine  whether  he  really  struggled  and 
fought  as  mightily  in  the  monastery  as  after  1515  he 
declares  that  he  did. 

The  young  monk  had  heard  lectures  at  the  univer- 
sity only  with  the  Okkamists  or  philosophers  of  the 
"modern"  school,  and  thus  when  he  entered  into  the 
monastery  he  had  the  firm  conviction:  man  can  do 
all  that  he  wills.  He  can,  for  instance,  fulfill  the  Ten 
Commandments  to  the  last  letter,  if  only  he  wants  to ; 
he  can  love  God  with  his  whole  heart,  with  his  whole 
soul  and  with  all  his  powers,  if  only  he  wants  to;  he 
can  even  force  his  reason  to  believe  that  black  is  white, 
in  fact,  he  can  create  in  himself  every  imaginable  con- 
cept, sensation  and  feeling,  moral  and  immoral  pas- 
sion, and  do  this  at  any  time,  unhampered  and  com- 
pletely, if  only  he  uses  his  will.  For,  because  the  will 
is  the  all-determining  psychic  force  it  is  itself  deter- 
mined by  nothing,  never  weakened  or  strengthened, 
increased  or  decreased  at  any  time  by  any  good  or 
evil  deed.     On  the  contrary,  it  remains  ever  un- 


74  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

changed,  the  same  in  quantity  and  quahty;  Hke  the 
needle  of  a  compass  it  always  returns  to  its  charac- 
teristic stabile  balance,  no  matter  how  often  it  is  di- 
verted in  the  direction  of  "good"  or  in  the  direction  of 
"evil." 

This  well-nigh  mythological  conception  of  the  es- 
sence and  force  of  the  will  was  strengthened  in  the 
young  monk  during  the  first  part  of  his  stay  in  the 
monastery.  In  the  first  place,  here  also  he  heard  only 
Okkamists  and  very  soon  studied  the  great  masters 
of  the  school,  Okkam,  d'Ailly,  Gerson  and  Biel  them- 
selves. Furthermore,  all  that  these  philosophers  de- 
clared theoretically  possible,  the  perfect  fulfillment 
of  all  commandments,  even  of  the  command  to  love 
God,  in  the  monastery  immediately  confronted  him 
as  a  pi'actical  requirement.  Lastly,  he  found  this 
point  of  view  confirmed  time  and  again  also  in  the 
ascetic  writers  with  whom  he  had  already  become 
familiar  as  a  novice.  For  no  matter  how  much  these 
latter  authors  spoke  of  "grace,"  not  one  of  them 
doubted  that  man  through  ascetic  practices,  prayer 
and  meditation  could  himself  prepare  his  soul  for  be- 
coming one  with  God.  And  none  of  them  omitted 
most  earnestly  to  encourage  his  readers  to  the  highest 
exertion  of  the  will.  Indeed,  the  greatest  of  them  all, 
Bernard  of  Clairvaux,  ventures  to  affirm  that  it  were 
possible  through  a  careful  control  and  regulation  of 
the  process  of  perception  gradually  to  convert  the  im- 
pulse of  natural  egotism  into  the  noble  passion  of  the 
true  love  of  God.  In  his  book  on  the  love  of  God  he 
minutely  describes  the  methods  to  be  used  for  that 
purpose. 


STAGES  IN  LUTHER'S  CONVERSION  75 

The  deepest  impression  along  these  hnes  was  un- 
doubtedly made  upon  the  young  monk  in  the  con- 
fessional where  again  and  again  his  attention  was 
drawn  to  these  conceptions.  For  wholly  in  keeping 
with  Master  Gabriel  Biel  who,  though  he  was  not  a 
strict  Okkamist,  was  nevertheless  in  the  monastery, 
and  everywhere  among  the  "moderns,"  accounted  a 
model  theologian,  the  Augustinians  of  Erfurt  taught: 
Man  achieves  absolution  from  the  eternal  punishment 
for  sin  or  from  the  guilt  of  sin  only  if  he  sincerely 
hates  and  loathes  evil.  AVhoever,  therefore,  thinks 
that  he  needs  only  to  confess  and  in  so  doing  evinces 
a  measure  of  fear  of  hell  and  purgatory  in  order  to 
receive  absolution  from  the  father  confessor  is  seri- 
ously mistaken.  The  so-called  "contrition  of  the  gal- 
lows," or  the  sorrow  over  the  evil  external  conse- 
quences of  sin  alone  never  brings  about  a  change  in  the 
attitude  of  God,  and  even  confession  and  priestly 
absolution  make  no  difference  in  this.  For,  though 
these  latter  are  useful  and  necessary,  one  must  not 
forget  that  the  priest  in  the  confessional  remits  only 
the  penances  imposed  by  the  Church  and  a  part  of  the 
temporal  penalties  of  sin,  never  the  eternal  punish- 
ment of  wrong-doing.  But  is  it  not  expecting  the 
impossible  of  man  to  demand  that  out  of  his  own 
power  he  must  be  completely  repentant?  By  no 
means.  All  he  needs  to  do  is  to  sub  j  ect  his  inner  Hf  e  to 
the  psychological  process  of  ennobling  suggested  by 
Bernard  of  Clairvaux,  and  thereby  gradually  trans- 
form the  natural  self-love  which  manifests  itself  in 
fear  of  punishment  and  the  contrition  of  the  gallows 


76  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

into  perfect  love  of  God.  This  love  by  its  very  nature 
always  includes  sincere  hatred  of  all  evil,  and  thus  the 
prerequisite  of  perfect  repentance  is  attained  by  the 
sinner's  own  efforts.  In  this  way  the  young  monk 
by  all  that  he  did  and  heard  was  most  energetically 
encouraged  to  torment,  torture  and  train  his  soul  in 
a  manner  in  which  otherwise  only  the  body  is  trained, 
to  the  end  that  he  might  wi-est  from  it  the  perfect  love 
of  God.  If  he  desired  to  be  saved  from  purgatory  and 
hell,  to  be  free  from  all  pangs  of  conscience,  if  he 
wished  to  be  a  true  monk,  the  initial  stipulation  was 
always  the  same:  love  God  above  everything.  And 
ever  again  the  alluring  inducement  was  added  to  this 
condition:  you  can,  if  only  you  want  to. 

But  then,  was  man  really  able  to  do  everything  he 
wanted  to  do,  in  fact,  could  he  even  in  this  case  will 
earnestly  and  with  all  his  power  what  he  himself 
wished  and  desired?  Since  his  university  days  Luther 
knew  no  other  attitude,  and  now  under  his  Okkamist 
teachers  he  read  and  heard  the  same  tenet  repeated 
over  and  over :  God  in  his  innermost  being  is  Willj  ex- 
actly like  man,  but  absolute,  eternal  and  ahnighty 
Will.  If  therefore  mere  human  will  can  be  deter- 
mined by  nothing  and  yet  completely  dominate  the 
life  of  the  soul,  God  is  in  the  highest  sense  of  the  word 
the  all- determining  Will,  determined  and  limited 
solely  by  itself,  that  is,  in  the  last  analysis  he  is  eternal 
and  almighty  arbitrariness.  This  is  clearly  shown  in 
his  actions  as  Creator.  Out  of  pure  arbitrariness  he 
called  this  particular  world,  and  no  other,  into  being, 
and  altogether  like  a  despot  he  now  disposes  and  gov- 


STAGES  IN  LUTHER'S  CONVERSION  77 

ems  in  it,  bound  only  by  the  "constitution"  he  himself 
gave  it,  to  be  in  force  as  long  as  he  wished  and  sub- 
ject to  the  condition  of  good  behavior.  It  is  secondly 
manifest  in  his  actions  as  a  Lawgiver.  Arbitrarily  he 
declared  one  deed  to  be  good  and  worthy  of  reward, 
another  as  bad  and  meriting  punishment,  for  nothing 
is  in  itself  either  good  or  bad.  Hence  he  could  at  any 
time  to-day  declare  good  what  only  yesterday  was  ac- 
counted evil,  and  to-morrow  punish  as  a  vice  what  to- 
day was  rewarded  as  a.  virtue. 

Most  flagrantly  God  reveals  himself  as  personified 
arbitrariness  in  the  third  place  in  his  actions  as  Sav- 
iour. No  rational  consideration,  but  simple  arbitrari- 
ness led  him  to  bring  about  salvation  through  a  god- 
man,  and  not  through  a  god-stone,  or  a  god-animal — 
to  predestine  a  portion  of  humanity  for  salvation  and 
the  others  for  damnation,  while  nevertheless  he  makes 
eternal  bliss  depend  upon  the  fulfillment  of  certain 
conditions.  Indeed,  it  was  arbitrariness  and  nothing 
else  which  made  him  feel  that  salvation  was  at  all 
necessary,  and  above  all  that  he  made  it  depend  upon 
the  sacramental  practices  of  the  Church.  For  if  any- 
thing is  certain,  it  is  surely  this  that  man  by  dint  of 
his  own  reason  and  strength  can  do  everything  that 
God  asks  of  him.  Even  the  greatest  and  most  severe 
task,  the  pure  and  disinterested  love  of  God,  is  not  too 
difficult  for  man.  In  spite  of  this,  every  human  being 
is  in  need  of  salvation,  though  not  for  inner  reasons 
but  rather  for  a  very  external  one. 

It  has  pleased  God  in  his  absolutism  to  look  only 
upon  those  actions  as  worthy  of  reward  which  he  in  a 


78     LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

sense  has  stampea  with  tne  "spiritual  ornament'  of 
"grace"  and  thereby  transformed  from  mere  good 
deeds  (merita  de  congruo)  into  merits  {merita  de 
condigno) .  Also  it  fm-ther  pleased  him  to  closely  link 
this  stamping  process  to  the  sacraments  of  the  Church. 
Not  in  the  sense  that  the  Church  has  the  power  to  di- 
rectly bring  about  this  stamping  or  application  of 
"grace"  through  its  sacraments;  that  is  always  done 
by  God  himself.  But  he  has  so  arranged  it  that  the 
stamping  always  occurs  simultaneously  with  the  sac- 
ramental acts  of  the  Church.  In  this  way  man,  though 
he  can  do  everything  that  God  asks  of  him  out  of  his 
own  power,  nevertheless  is  always  in  need  of  the 
Church  and  of  "grace" — not  in  order  to  become  a 
changed  man  internally,  but  merely  to  gain  the  recog- 
nition of  the  despot  "God."  This  is  not  very  difficult 
to  attain  if  man  does  what  he  can.  God  unfailingly 
gives  his  works  the  character  of  merits  and  thereby 
makes  them  legal  tender  in  heaven.  Not  that  man 
could  force  God  to  do  this, — but  the  Lord  of  the 
Universe  has  contractually  bound  himself  on  this 
point,  and  since  he  is  unchangeable  and  truthful  man 
may  count  on  it  that  God  will  always  scrupulously 
observe  this  pact. 

This  was  the  God  whom  the  young  Luther  had 
before  his  eyes,  whom  he  wanted  to  love  and  was  told 
to  love,  indeed,  as  he  believed,  had  to  love  if  he  wished 
to  gain  forgiveness  for  his  sins,  salvation  and  eternal 
happiness.  If  we  consider  these  facts  we  will  step  by 
step  be  able  to  realize  with  him  what  he  felt  and  what 
since  1515  he  tells  of  the  struggles  of  his  soul.    Only 


STAGES  IN  LUTHER'S  CONVERSION  79 

then  will  we  be  able  wholly  to  comprehend  that  he 
feared,  indeed,  hated  God,  and  was  so  terribly  worried 
over  the  problem  of  predestination.  For  at  all  times 
he  had  before  his  mind's  eye  the  God  of  Okkam,  the 
God  of  absolute  omnipotence  and  arbitrariness  who 
damned  and  saved  as  it  pleased  him.  Further,  we  will 
then  understand  that  he  tortured  himself  incessantly 
"to  do  sufficient  good  works  to  win  a  merciful  God," 
and  that  at  times,  like  a  mad  and  haughty  saint,  he 
believed  to  have  "done  his  part."  For  he  knew  no 
other  view  than  this  that  man  was  able  and  obliged 
to  earn  "grace"  by  his  own  power.  Furthermore,  we 
then  see  that  the  promises  of  grace  in  Scriptures  and 
in  the  Hturgy  could  make  no  impression  upon  him,  no 
matter  how  tempting  and  consolatory  they  might 
sound.  The  word  "grace"  necessarily  always  called 
to  his  mind  first  of  all  the  spiritual  "ornament"  by 
which  God  was  said  to  give  to  good  works  the  char- 
acter of  merit,  and  he  was  firmly  convinced  that  this 
"spiritual  ornament"  also  must  first  be  deserved. 
Such  considerations  enable  us  to  understand  why 
Luther  never  could  or  would  cease  worrying  over 
his  sin,  for  upon  conscientious  self-examination  he 
never  found  in  himself  as  much  humility  and  love  of 
God  as  Biel  and  Bernard  and  other  monkish  saints 
demanded.  Lastly,  we  understand  in  view  of  these 
facts  why  the  priestly  absolution  dispensed  in  the  sac- 
rament of  penance  was  to  him  an  altogether  insuffi- 
cient consolation.  He  had  learned  from  Biel  that 
it  is  not  absolution  which  brings  about  forgiveness  of 
sins,  but  alone  true  contrition  springing  from  the 


80  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

perfect  love  of  God.  It  is,  therefore,  not  an  exaggera- 
tion to  assert  that  it  is  the  "modern"  theology,  Biel's 
doctrine  on  penance  and  the  monastic  teaching  about 
the  royal  road  of  humility  and  love  which  first  plunged 
Luther  into  the  terrible  doubts  and  troubles  of  con- 
science, about  which  later  on  he  speaks  so  frequently, 
and  always  so  vividly  and  impressively. 

Granting  that  this  is  true,  how  came  it  that  just 
Luther  was  so  strongly  and  peculiarly  affected  by 
this  modern  theology,  that  he  particularly  was  so 
powerfully  shaken  by  Biel's  teaching  on  penance  and 
the  old  monastic  doctrine  of  humility,  and  that  espe- 
cially he  was  so  sorely  troubled  by  the  fear  of  sin? 
Other  monks  who  studied  exactly  the  same  things 
and  undertook  the  very  same  exercises  were  not  so 
affected.  Does  this  observation  not  make  the  suppo- 
sition very  probable  that  his  nerves  were  not  quite 
in  order,  especially  since  not  even  so  experienced  a 
mentor  of  souls  as  John  von  Staupitz  understood  his 
"temptations"  and  evidently  regarded  Luther's  fear 
of  sin  as  abnormal?  Certainly  his  condition  was  not 
"normal,"  and  it  is  very  probable  that  his  nervous 
system  suffered  severely  under  the  strain  of  hard 
study,  fasting,  waking  and  living  in  an  unheated  cell. 
But  does  this  justify  us  to  forthwith  conclude  that 
his  fear  of  sin  was  nothing  more  than  a  symptom  of 
psychic  derangement  caused  by  the  unaccustomed 
physical  and  emotional  exertions  of  monastery  life? 
That  would  be  overshooting  the  mark  altogether.  The 
psychic  abnormality  which  was  at  bottom  of  all  this 
worry  was  not  acquired  by  Luther  after  his  entrance 


STAGES  IN  LUTHER'S  CONVERSION  81 

into  the  monastery.  It  can  be  shown  that  he  suffered 
from  it  already  .as  a  student  and  never  again  got  rid 
of  it  as  long  as  he  lived  though  otherwise  he  was  a 
person  of  robust  health  of  body  and  soul. 

What  was  the  character  of  this  abnormality?  It 
consisted  simply  in  a  particularly  delicate  and  sensi- 
tive conscience,  and  an  unusually  keen  and  live  sense 
of  truth.  In  this  tender  conscience  and  this  inexorably 
rigid  truthfulness  in  the  judgment  of  himself  we  must 
see  the  real  cause  of  these  internal  tribulations.  On 
the  other  hand,  the  old  monastic  teaching  of  humility, 
Biel's  doctrine  of  penance,  the  hard  and  cruel  picture 
of  God  and  the  fantastic  conception  of  man  found 
in  "modern"  theology  must  be  looked  upon  merely  as 
the  occasion  and  external  impetus  which  set  in  motion 
this  strongest  and  most  sensitive  chord  of  his  inner 
self  and  for  a  long  time  kept  it  in  a  state  of  quivering 
excitement  and  susceptibility. 

Had  Luther  not  been  so  unusually  sensitive,  Biel, 
Okkam  and  the  old  monkish  teachers  would  certainly 
have  been  as  little  able  to  touch  him  as  his  more  coarse- 
grained comrades  in  the  monastery.  He  would  then, 
however,  have  turned  out  to  be  only  a  good  average 
person  like  these,  and  every  trace  of  his  sojourn  on 
earth  would  like  his  ashes  have  long  since  disappeared. 
This  very  conscience  with  its  sensitive  organism  which 
now  caused  him  so  much  unrest,  on  the  other  hand, 
like  the  restless  mechanism  of  a  watch  was  also  the 
live-force  which  drove  him  on.  As  time  wore  on  it 
pushed  him  ever  farther  from  the  beaten  path  of  the 
old  faith,  and  with  increasing  energy  urged  him  to 


82     LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

give  to  the  religious  problem  that  altogether  personal 
formulation  by  which  unbeknown  to  himself,  he  al- 
ready stepped  outside  of  the  limits  of  the  Catholic  sys- 
tem. The  problem  as  he  put  it  was :  How  will  I,  the 
single  individual,  become  absolutely  certain  of  for- 
giveness of  sin  and  thereby  of  the  grace  of  God? 

What  Luther  tells  us  of  the  conflicts  of  his  soul  is 
thus  indirectly  confirmed  by  the  books  which  he  studied 
in  the  monastery.  It  is  merely  necessary  for  us  to  give 
serious  heed  to  the  demand  made  by  Denifle  and 
Grisar,  and  to  peruse  these  books  with  the  eyes  of  a 
psychologist,  that  is,  always  attempt  while  reading  to 
feel  what  impression  they  must  necessarily  make  upon 
a  thoughtful,  serious  young  monk  with  a  tendency  to 
"scruples"  who  in  his  anguish  of  heart  thrice  made  the 
great  confession,  and  for  a  time  daily  went  to  be 
shriven.  But  naturally  this  method  does  not  yet  prove 
that  the  statements  of  the  Reformer  about  the  time 
and  turning  point  of  his  severe  inner  crisis,  the  expe- 
rience in  the  tower  of  the  Black  Cloister,  are  all  cor- 
rect. At  any  rate,  it  is  advisable  for  us  here  also  to 
adopt  the  method  of  getting  down  to  the  documents 
themselves,  that  is,  that  for  once  we  make  a  close  study 
of  the  manuscripts  of  the  period  in  which  he  himself 
places  this  event,  the  late  autumn  of  1512  (Weimar 
edition,  vol.  45,  p.  86)  to  March,  1515.  Period  of  his 
becoming  acquainted  with  Augustine's  treatise  on 
the  Letter  and  the  Spirit. 

A  study  of  this  kind  must  above  all  deal  with  the 
preparations  and  notes  for  his  first  course  of  lectures 
on  the  Psalms  delivered  between  July  or  August, 


STAGES  IN  LUTHER'S  CONVERSION  83 

1513,  and  March,  1515.  What  do  these  teach  us?  In 
the  first  place,  they  indicate  that  Luther  must  have 
been  quite  closely  conversant  with  the  Epistle  to  the 
Romans  as  early  as  the  summer  of  1513,  for  he  cites 
it  on  every  occasion,  even  in  his  marginal  notes  to  the 
commentary  by  Faber  which  he  used  for  the  Psalms. 
Secondly,  they  prove  that  even  at  this  time  he  under- 
stood the  Epistle,  and  thirdly,  that  the  decisive  turn  in 
his  inner  development  must  have  been  passed  some 
time  before,  since  all  those  views  which  pre-eminently 
stamp  him  a  heretic  are  already  found  in  these  docu- 
ments though  often  still  in  a  clouded  and  conflicting 
form. 

Thus,  for  instance,  we  meet  the  conviction:  the 
greatest  evil  is  guilt,  the  greatest  good  the  cancellation 
of  this  guilt,  in  other  words,  the  possession  of  a  ''secure 
conscience."  Furthermore,  we  find  the  recognition 
that  no  man  can  force  this  security  of  conscience  from 
himself  or  earn  it  by  his  own  efforts.  It  is  obtained 
solely  through  the  aid  of  God  who  instills  into  the  soul 
the  trust  in  his  mercy.  Further  we  note  the  firm  con- 
viction: in  and  with  this  trust  or  faith  God  gives  to 
man  also  the  power  to  do  good.  Lastly  these  old  note- 
books show  beyond  a  doubt  that  the  passage  Romans 
1 :17  must  have  had  a  very  special  importance  for  the 
young  instructor,  so  often  is  he  busy  with  the  concept 
of  the  righteousness  of  God,  so  emphatically  does  he 
ever  anew  develop  the  religious  ideas  previously  de- 
rived from  a  correct  understanding  of  it.  In  short, 
these  notes  furnish  us  the  documentary  proof  for  the 
fact  that  Romans  1  ;17  really  had  for  Luther  become 


84  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

the  gate  of  paradise,  and  that  the  enlightening  of 
which  he  speaks  in  later  years  in  reality  took  place  in 
the  period  which  he  himself  indicates,  that  is,  in  the 
end  of  the  year  1512  or  the  opening  of  1513,  in  the 
first  months,  therefore,  after  his  promotion  to  a  pro- 
fessorship in  the  theological  faculty  at  Wittenberg. 

But  we  must  guard  against  misinterpreting  this 
result.  The  young  professor  who  in  his  cramped 
study  is  bothering  his  head  about  the  concept  of  the 
righteousness  of  God,  and  the  Reformer  Luther  who 
in  the  same  small  room  writes  against  the  Papacy  are 
two  entirely  different  persons.  The  former  still  re- 
mained a  true  monk  and  Scholastic  for  years  to  come. 
He  grows  into  his  new  religious  point  of  view  only 
very  gradually,  and  the  old  ideals  and  authorities  lose 
their  power  over  his  soul  by  slow  degrees  only.  It  is 
not  until  some  time  in  1515  that  he  completely  suc- 
ceeds in  shaking  off  the  last  remnant  of  the  network 
of  the  Okkamistic  doctrine  on  salvation  which  he  had 
torn  long  before.  Thereafter,  in  the  course  of  the 
year  1516  he  overcomes  the  monkish  views  on  hu- 
mility and  learns  that  humble  submission  to  the  will 
of  God  is  not  sufficient,  but  that  there  must  be  added 
thereto  the  glad  trust  in  his  mercy.  Not  until  the 
turning  of  the  year  1516-17,  however,  does  he  dare  to 
discard  altogether  his  pastoral  doubts  about  the  doc- 
trine of  the  certainty  of  salvation,  and  his  monkish 
aversion  to  the  thought  that  a  pious  person  may  con- 
fidently count  on  the  mercy  of  God  without  seeming 
to  infringe  on  humility.  Only  after  all  this  does  he 
frankly  and  freely  assert:  It  is  impossible  to  trust  in 


STAGES  IN  LUTHER'S  CONVERSION  85 

God  without  at  the  same  time  being  absolutely  certain 
of  salvation  and  eternal  bliss. 

Because  this  forward  movement  was  so  slow  and  so 
gradual  Luther  himself  never  fully  realized  how  dia- 
metrically opposite  to  the  basic  views  of  Catholic  piety 
his  attitude  had  become  and  was  destined  increasingly 
to  become.  "In  error  and  ignorance,"  "as  a  horse 
whose  eyes  had  been  blinded,  God  led  him  onward 
and  upward,"  until  finally  he  had  been  so  far  matured 
and  steadied  internally  that  he  was  able,  though  again 
not  "knowingly  and  with  foresight,"  but  without  the 
least  presentiment  whither  his  course  would  lead  him 
to  challenge  publicly  the  "misguided  seducers  of  the 
people"  whom  he  had  previously  so  sharply  attacked 
in  his  lectures  on  Romans. 


CHAPTER  III. 

Luther* s  Helpers  and  Guides  During  the  Conversion. 

T^ID  this  development,  as  it  has  just  been  sketched, 
-L'  take  place  without  external  influences,  or  did  the 
young  monk  find  helpers  and  guides  upon  the  lonely 
path  which  he  was  treading  almost  like  a  somnambu- 
list, securely,  but  without  clearly  realizing  his  fate? 
Did  Luther  have  mentors  and  guides  who  pointed  out 
to  him  the  right  way,  accompanied  him,  or  even  pre- 
ceded him? 

This  question  has  also  been  much  discussed  of  late 
but  very  differently  answered.  According  to  Denifle 
we  ought  to  look  upon  William  of  Okkam  as  his  fore- 
most teacher  and  master;  Albert  Maria  Weiss,  O.  P., 
holds  that  John  Wiclif  must  be  given  this  place; 
Braun  and  John  Ficker  believe  that  the  mediaeval 
Mystics  and  John  von  Staupitz  were  responsible  for 
his  views ;  Loof s  names  St.  Augustine  and  Bernard  of 
Clairvaux;  Biittner,  Stange  and  Mandel  mention 
John  Tauler  and  the  anonymous  author  of  the  "Ger- 
man Theology";  H.  Barge  claims  that  Karlstadt, 
though  not  acting  as  his  forerunner  exactly,  at  least 
preceded  him  in  the  battle,  while  Kampschulte,  Jans- 
sen,  Pastor  and  other  Catholic  investigators  assert 
that  even  after  the  beginning  of  the  public  conflict  the 
Humanists  Crotus  Rubeanus  and  Ulrich  von  Hutten 
decisively  influenced  his  actions  and  convictions,  in- 


LUTHER'S  HELPERS  AND  GUIDES  87 

deed,  really  trained  him  up  and  induced  him  to  assume 
the  role  of  leader  of  the  nation  against  Rome. 

Attempts  to  solve  this  interesting  educational  prob- 
lem are  therefore  not  lacking.  Naturally  not  all  of 
these  solutions  are  real  solutions.  Barge's  statement, 
for  example,  about  the  influence  of  Karlstadt  on  the 
Reformer  is  disproven  by  a  mere  glance  into  the  lec- 
tures on  Romans  of  the  years  1515-16.  Here  we  find 
the  whole  ensemble  of  opinions  which  Karlstadt  on  the 
twenty-sixth  of  April,  1517,  proposed  in  his  152 
theses.  But  not  always  is  it  possible  so  quickly  to  sift 
truth  and  error.  For  that  reason  we  will  have  to  tarry 
a  moment  over  some  of  these  attempted  explanations. 

Early  in  the  smnmer  of  1515  the  Reformer  sum- 
marily refers  to  the  Okkamists  as  "hog  theologians." 
One  might  conclude  from  this  that  he  had  even  then 
severed  connections  for  all  time  with  Okkam  and  his 
fellows.  But  such  a  conclusion  would  be  overhasty. 
Luther  never  quite  got  through  with  the  hog  theo- 
logians. In  a  measure  he  remained  an  Okkamist  dur- 
ing his  whole  life,  in  fact,  in  some  of  his  doctrines  he 
must,  as  Denifle  declares,  actually  be  regarded  as  a 
disciple  of  Okkam,  who  carried  on  and  developed  his 
work.  Luther's  teachings  about  the  eucharist  and 
about  the  omnipresence  of  the  body  of  Christ,  and  all 
that  he  puts  forth  in  concepts,  proofs  and  analogies  in 
the  conflict  over  these  doctrines  goes  back  directly  to 
this  source  and  to  d'Ailly  and  Biel.  Indeed,  it  seems 
almost  as  though  Luther  had  had  the  feeling  that  he 
could  bring  this  controversy  to  a  successful  issue  only 
if  he  fought  as  an  Okkamist,  so  abruptly  and  without 


88     LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

reservation  does  he  at  the  time  in  his  polemics  use  for 
his  purpose  the  Okkamist  view  on  revelation  as  a  sum 
of  non-rational  teachings,  so  unconditionally  does  he 
after  the  manner  of  this  authority  demand  in  the  name 
of  faith,  the  sacrifice  of  intellect,  the  captivity  of  rea- 
son and  a  blind  submission  to  the  non-rational  "tenets'* 
of  Christian  doctrine. 

But  not  only  on  this  point,  and  not  exclusively  in 
those  dogmas  which  were  later  on  so  frequently  re- 
garded as  arch-Lutheran  does  the  Reformer  appear  as 
a  true  pupil  of  Okkam.  He  followed  the  Invincible 
Doctor  elsewhere  also  more  often  than  is  commonly 
suspected  both  in  his  ideas  and  methods  of  thought. 
Classic  examples  are  his  much-discussed  doctrines  on 
the  inviolability  of  the  confessional  and  on  the  permis- 
sibility of  the  white  lie.  Other  instances  substantiat- 
ing his  dependence  are  his  teachings  on  the  law  of 
nature  and  natural  right,  on  the  position  of  the  secular 
government  over  against  natural  and  written  law,  on 
the  right  of  the  civil  power  to  reform  the  Church,  and 
furthermore  his  deprecatory  judgment  on  jurispru- 
dence and  the  jurists,  his  gruff  verdict  on  the  "blind 
and  mad  heathen  Aristotle,"  and  all  the  philosophers, 
who  like  the  Stagy  rite  give  themselves  up  to  meta- 
physics, his  views  on  the  relation  of  reason  to  revela- 
tion, and  his  highly  characteristic  utterances  on  the 
hopeless  inadequacy  of  reason  in  an  inquiry  into  the 
ultimate  causes  of  all  existence  which  lie  altogether  be- 
yond the  realm  of  experience. 

It  is  therefore  downright  impossible  to  comprehend 
Luther's  theology,  in  fact  his  whole  point  of  view  in 


LUTHER'S  HELPERS  AND  GUIDES  89 

life,  without  continually  bearing  in  mind  that  he 
passed  through  the  school  of  the  "moderns,"  the 
"Modernists"  of  those  days.  However,  dare  we  for 
this  reason  like  Denifle  summarily  dispose  of  him  as 
an  "ossified  Okkamist"?  That  would  mean  doing 
plain  violence  to  the  truth.  For  if  we  center  our  at- 
tention upon  the  religious  basis  of  his  message,  his 
concept  of  evil  and  sin,  of  forgiveness  and  of  grace,  of 
law  and  gospel,  of  piety  as  a  religious  and  as  a  moral 
attitude,  we  recognize  without  difficulty  that  these 
fundamental  ideas  were  arrived  at  in  a  struggle  with 
the  theology  of  Okkam. 

Luther's  Christianity,  therefore,  is  everything  but 
ossified  or  softened  Okkamism.  Quite  to  the  contrary, 
it  is  in  all  its  essential  features  the  most  complete  con- 
trast to  the  teachings  of  this  theologian  that  can  be 
imagined.  This  does  not  preclude  the  fact  that  Ok- 
kam, even  if  he  did  not  directly  aid  Luther,  at  least 
materially  eased  his  task  of  overcoming  medieval  re- 
ligion. For  Okkam  was  not  only  the  Antichrist  but 
also  the  anti-Catholic  among  the  great  thinkers  of 
the  Middle  Ages,  not  merely  the  confessed  antipode 
of  mediaeval  Christianity  but  also  the  sharpest  critic 
of  the  mediceval  features  in  this  Christianity. 

The  classical  Middle  Ages  were  as  yet  incapable 
of  comprehending  the  spiritual  in  a  purely  spiritual 
sense.  Just  as  they  always  conceived  God  in  some 
manner  as  a  substance  so  they  also  viewed  sin,  if  not 
directly  as  a  substance,  at  least  as  a  lack  of  substance, 
and  looked  upon  grace  as  the  heavenly  material  which 
compensates  for  this  lack;  while  justification  to  them 


90  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  EECENT  RESEARCH 

was  the  process  by  which  this  deficiency  is  equaHzed 
and  man  in  a  trice  converted  from  a  sinner  into  a 
righteous  person. 

Duns  Skotus  was  the  first  to  attack  these  "massive" 
concepts,  and  he  was  soon  followed  with  greater  au- 
thoritativeness  by  Okkam.  While  the  latter  conceived 
God  strictly  as  will,  he  also  saw  in  sin  only  a  function- 
ing of  the  will  and  in  grace  actually  only  a  "spiritual 
ornament"  or  a  sort  of  stamp  by  which  God  recognizes 
as  acceptable  the  performances  of  man.  Accordingly, 
he  understood  forgiveness  of  sin  no  more  to  mean  the 
infusion  of  the  substance  of  righteousness  into  man, 
but  held  that  it  signified  merely  the  non-imputation  of 
sin  to  man.  Augustine's  "justification"  he  allows  to 
stand  as  an  independent  process  following  the  non- 
imputation  of  sin,  but  for  practical  purposes  this 
dogma  seemed  to  him  perfectly  meaningless  and  su- 
perfluous. He  was  altogether  at  a  loss  what  to  do 
with  it.  Meanwhile  he  evidently  desired  to  destroy 
to  the  very  root  the  old  Christian  idea  of  salvation  by 
grace.  In  reality,  however,  he  killed  only  the  belief 
in  the  old  imperfect  massive  formulation  of  this  doc- 
trine. 

Thus  Luther  had  only  to  throw  overboard  entirely 
the  now  wholly  sterile  and  empty  concepts  of  grace 
and  justification  which  the  great  Englishman  had  re- 
tained and  to  give  a  new  content  to  the  very  hollow 
idea  of  "non-imputation  of  sin"  in  accordance  with 
his  own  religious  point  of  view,  and  he  had  done  with 
the  Catholic  system  in  this  particular.  This  was  self- 
evidently  not  as  easily  or  quickly  done  as  it  would 


LUTHER'S  HELPERS  AND  GUIDES  91 

seem  to  us  to-day.  On  the  contrary,  it  cost  Luther 
hard  struggles  and  weary  labor.  Nevertheless,  there 
remains  no  doubt  that  Okkam  made  this  task  easier 
for  him  and  furnished  him  in  the  concept  of  "non- 
imputation  of  sin"  with  a  formula  which  he  could 
readily  employ  for  the  presentation  of  his  own  views. 

The  critical  work  of  Okkam  and  his  school  was 
equally  important  for  Luther  in  another  matter.  As 
in  the  doctrine  of  salvation,  so  these  wise  "advocates 
of  the  cause  of  man  versus  Augustine"  tried  also  in 
the  dogma  and  the  sacrament  of  penance  to  show  that 
man  could  by  his  own  power  do  all  God  required  of 
him,  and  that  hence  for  internal  reasons  he  really  in 
penance  needed  "grace"  just  as  little  as  the  Church. 
Therefore  Biel,  for  ey^mple,  regards  non-sacramental 
penance  as  much  mt  important  than  the  sacrament 
of  penance.  What  i  the  elements  of  this  non-sacra- 
mental penance  accciding  to  Biel?  They  consist  in 
a  "change  of  attituac  '  in  man  which  necessarily  in 
turn  brings  about  a  change  in  the  attitude  of  God, 
that  is,  it  causes  God  to  cancel  the  threatened  sentence 
and  to  again  regard  the  sinner  as  fit  for  eternal  sal- 
vation. 

On  the  face  of  it  this  theory  reminds  one  so  strik- 
ingly of  Luther's  later  point  of  view  that  one  would 
feign  believe  that  he  had  learned  directly  from  Biel 
on  this  point.  Upon  closer  inspection,  however,  this 
impression  vanishes.  In  the  case  of  Luther  the 
"change  of  attitude"  on  the  part  of  God  comes  first, 
while  Biel  always  conceived  it  as  the  result  of  the 
"change  of  attitude"  in  man.     Luther  believes  that 


92     LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

God  alone  can  bring  this  change  in  man  about,  while 
Biel  contends  that  man  can  and  must  effect  it  himself. 
With  Luther,  therefore,  the  whole  emphasis  lies  upon 
the  act  of  God,  with  Biel  it  rests  upon  the  act  of  man. 
This  alone  shows  that  Biel's  doctrine  of  penance  at 
first  necessarily  precipitated  Luther  into  ever  new 
doubts  and  fears.  Only  after  he  had  gained  the  mas- 
tery over  the  in  his  opinion  deadly  fundamental  idea 
of  Biel  was  he  able  to  draw  honey  even  from  this 
poisonous  flower.  Not  until  then  did  Biel's  criticism 
of  the  Church's  doctrine  of  penance  become  important 
and  valuable  to  him  as  a  means  by  which  he  might 
break  and  throw  aside  the  hollow  shells  of  the  old 
dogma  which  had  been  left  over  in  this  process  of 
criticism. 

However,  Okkam  was  not  only  the  most  acute 
critic  of  the  CathoHc  dogma  of  salvation  whom  the 
Middle  Ages  had  seen,  he  was  likewise  one  of  the 
sharpest  critics  and  antagonists  of  the  hierarchical 
system.  He  already  asserted  tersely  and  without 
equivocation :  Popes  and  councils  can  err ;  he  declared 
it  an  open  question  whether  the  monarchical  form  of 
government  were  beneficial  to  the  Church ;  he  denied 
that  the  Pope  and  the  clergy  had  any  right  whatso- 
ever to  mix  in  secular  affairs,  and  would  at  most  per- 
mit the  former  to  count  as  a  cult  official  who  in  secular 
matters  was  quite  as  much  subject  to  the  Emperor  as 
all  other  men. 

We  do  not  know  how  far  the  Reformer  before  151 7 
became  acquainted  with  these  radical  opinions.  In 
any  case  it  was  not  immaterial  for  his  development 


LUTHER'S  HELPERS  AND  GUIDES  93 

that  he  grew  up  amidst  the  views  of  a  theological 
school  whose  founders  and  most  influential  spokes- 
men were  pronounced  enemies  of  the  Papal  system. 
He  certainly  never  was  a  "Papist"  in  the  strict  sense 
of  the  word,  not  even  when  he  still  held  very  high 
notions  of  the  sanctity  of  the  Roman  Church.  At 
most  he  may  be  called  an  Episcopalist.  Therefore, 
when  Prierias  and  Eck  forced  him  to  take  a  stand 
over  against  the  curialistic  point  of  view  he  was  able 
to  do  so  in  a  relatively  short  time  and  without  experi- 
encing serious  inner  conflicts. 

Did  the  Okkamists  thus  give  him  only  negative  aid 
through  their  critical  work  ?  Did  they  not  also  imme- 
diately, by  means  of  positive  suggestion  and  hints,  as- 
sist him  out  of  the  labyrinth  of  doubt  and  terrors  of 
conscience  into  which  they  themselves  among  others 
had  plunged  him?  If  we  read  what  the  "Invincible 
Doctor"  himself  says  about  the  Bible  in  his  renowned 
Dialogue  and  elsewhere,  it  would  indeed  seem  that 
though  he  did  not  directly  show  the  young  monk  the 
way  out  of  his  inner  disturbances  he  nevertheless  em- 
phatically pointed  out  to  him  the  source  where  alone 
he  would  find  right  advice.  Among  other  things,  for 
instance,  Okkam  says :  Holy  Writ  alone  is  infallible, 
therefore  a  Christian  is  in  duty  bound  to  believe  only 
what  is  found  in  the  Bible  or  what  can  with  logical 
consistency  be  deduced  from  its  words.  Could  this 
suggestion  be  of  much  help  to  Luther  ?  Only  if  Okkam 
at  the  same  time  opened  up  to  him  an  understanding 
of  Scriptures.  For  the  mere  study  of  the  Bible  Luther 
practised  diligently  enough  in  accordance  with  the 


94  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

precepts  of  his  order  and  from  his  own  vohtion.  Was 
Okkam  fitted  to  teach  Luther  the  understanding  of 
Holy  Writ?  In  reply  it  is  sufficient  to  note  the  fact 
that  in  Okkam's  eyes  the  Bible  was  merely  a  hap- 
hazard collection  of  non-rational  divine  oracles;  that 
he  always  saw  in  the  teaching  of  the  Church  the  cor- 
rect interpretation  of  these,  and  that  he  believed  his 
own  doctrine  of  salvation  in  turn  to  be  an  accurate 
rendering  of  the  dogmas  of  the  Church.  He  was  thus 
in  reality  not  a  biblicist,  and  consequently  could  never 
have  made  one  out  of  Luther.  Indeed,  had  Luther 
followed  him,  the  Bible  would  ever  have  remained  to 
him  a  book  with  seven  seals,  and  he  would  never  even 
have  thought  of  seriously  and  with  an  unbiased  mind 
determining  the  true  content  of  the  sacred  book. 

Not  until  after  the  Reformer  comprehended  the 
Bible  and  was  quite  certain  of  his  new  convictions  did 
the  teaching  of  the  moderns  relative  to  the  Bible  as- 
sume a  certain  significance  also  for  him.  But  again 
this  was  due  not  to  the  positive  content  of  this  teaching 
but  merely  on  account  of  its  negative  conclusions, 
that  is,  because  of  its  polemics  against  the  infallibility 
of  the  Pope  and  the  councils.  It  is  therefore  hardly 
possible  to  rate  too  highly  the  influence  of  Okkamisl 
criticism  upon  the  development  of  Luther.  It  offered 
him  a  whole  arsenal  of  weapons  for  the  fight  against 
the  Catholic  dogma,  and  against  the  Catholic  consti- 
tutional and  legal  system.  Furthermore,  step  by 
step  it  rendered  his  internal  conflict  with  the  old  faith 
less  difficult,  and  in  fact  furnished  him  in  the  clearly 
worked  out  formula  of  the  "non-imputation  of  guilt 


LUTHER'S  HELPERS  AND  GUIDES  95 

by  the  grace  of  God"  a  scaffolding  of  concepts  admir- 
ably suited  to  the  presentation  of  his  new  convictions. 
But  for  these  convictions  themselves  the  Okkamists 
must  in  no  way  be  held  responsible,  these  he  did  not 
receive  from  them.  On  the  contrary,  he  attained  and 
was  forced  to  attain  them  by  dint  of  steady  battling 
against  this  theological  school. 

Perhaps  the  young  monk  was  most  aided  in  his 
troubles  by  Biel  and  not  by  Okkam  himself,  in  that 
this  "leading  publicist  of  Okkamist  orthodoxy"  who, 
of  course,  is  no  longer  an  altogether  sound  representa- 
tive of  the  system,  emphatically  pointed  Augustine 
out  to  Luther  again  and  again  as  the  greatest  of  all 
theologians. 

Luther  began  to  study  Augustine  no  later  than 
1508.  The  very  first  impression  of  the  Church  Father 
upon  him  was  so  profound  that  the  monk  continued  to 
read  him  "until  he  had  read  and  made  his  own  almost 
the  entire  writings  of  the  great  teacher."  What  was  it 
that  so  captivated  Luther?  If  we  may  place  faith  in 
the  marginal  notes  by  his  own  hand  in  his  desk  copy 
it  was  at  first  especially  the  mystic  philosophical  spec- 
ulation of  Augustine  about  God,  the  world,  the  soul, 
the  valuelessness  of  all  earthly  things  and  the  eternal 
happiness  in  God. 

These  thoughts  of  com-se  were  hardly  new  to 
Luther.  He  had  met  them  before  in  Bernard  of 
Clairvaux  and  other  mystics  and  was  soon  after  con- 
fronted by  them  in  a  still  more  pronounced  form  in 
Dionysius  Areopagita.  But  now  seemingly  for  the 
first  time  was  he  so  powerfully  gripped  by  them  that 


96     LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

he  endeavored  quite  in  the  manner  of  the  young  Au- 
gustine and  the  Neoplatonists  to  raise  himself  up  to 
the  level  of  God  through  mystic  speculation,  "to  climb 
up  into  the  Majesty,"  to  "behold  the  pure  Majesty," 
to  become  immediately  conscious  of  and  one  with  God 
through  visions  and  ecstasies.  And  actually  there 
were  hours  when  he  believed  himself  to  be  "amidst 
the  choirs  of  angels."  But  sober  reaction  never  failed 
to  set  in.  The  terrors  of  conscience  returned,  and  a 
real  confidence  in  the  method  of  the  Mystics  would 
never  appear.  It  was  impossible  for  him  thus  rapidly 
to  completely  transform  his  nature  by  speculation, 
or  to  forget  entirely  what  he  had  learned  in  the  school 
of  Okkam  about  the  absolute  incapacity  of  human 
reason  to  fathom  God's  nature,  will  and  work.  There- 
fore he- never  could — as  his  marginal  glosses  show — 
really  assimilate  completely  the  fundamental  dogma 
of  the  Mystics  about  the  divine  ideas.  Instead  of 
moving  freely  and  unhampered  in  the  rare  ether  of 
speculation,  he  always  dropped  back  again  into  the  old 
"method  of  authority,"  which  Augustine  himself  had 
never  scorned,  and  which  directed  him  to  seek  God  in 
the  historical  revelation. 

The  unrest  and  motion  which  hereby  entered  into 
his  thinking  is  still  faithfully  mirrored  in  the  lectures 
on  the  Psalms  given  in  1513-15.  Here  we  find,  first, 
the  fundamental  ideas  of  his  new  religious  point  of 
view,  however  secondly,  side  by  side  with  them, 
also  occasional  genuinely  Okkamistic  reflections,  and 
thirdly,  a  number  of  passages  that  sound  almost 
Neoplatonic  and  Mystic.     A  closer   study  reveals 


LUTHER'S  HELPERS  AND  GUIDES  97 

the  fact  that  the  basic  dogmas  of  Neoplatonic 
metaphysics  had  remained  strange  to  Luther.  He 
neither  beheves  that  the  general  concepts  of 
human  reason  accurately  correspond  to  the  "ideas," 
nor  the  invisible  and  eternal  original  forces  which 
supposedly  condition  and  determine  the  nature 
and  essence  of  individual  phenomena,  nor  does 
he  see  in  the  world  of  being  a  system  of  graduated 
forces  and  existences  which  all  spring  from  the  orig- 
inal being,  God,  and  are  continually  connected  with 
him  as  with  their  living  focus.  Likewise  he  knows  of 
no  methodical  and  gradual  upward  trend  of  the  proc- 
ess of  thinking  from  the  lower  to  the  highest  forms 
of  being,  nor  does  he  with  the  Neoplatonists  regard 
that  which  is  carnal,  perceptible  and  visible  as  merely 
an  illusion  or  as  non-existing,  much  though  he  occa- 
sionally stresses  the  absolute  value  of  the  transcen- 
dental, spiritual  and  invisible,  and  emphasizes  the 
worthlessness  of  that  which  is  visible.  If  we  ask  what, 
so  to  speak,  immunized  Luther  against  these  doctrines 
the  answer  can  only  be :  Okkam's  criticism  of  the  pure 
speculative  intelligence,  which  had  accustomed  Luther 
to  regard  general  concepts  merely  as  symbols  or  signs 
for  a  wholly  unknown  and  unknowable  thing  in  itself, 
and  to  see  in  the  divine  ideas  only  the  concepts  of  God 
about  an  individual  phenomenon.  That  is,  Okkam 
after  all  in  this  point  retained  the  victory  over  Au- 
gustine. 

However,  was  Luther*s  association  with  Neopla- 
tonic Mysticism  for  this  reason  without  value  for  his 
development?   By  no  means.    Though  he  did  not  find 


98     LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

in  it  the  solution  of  his  doubts  and  internal  troubles 
it  acted  as  an  antidote  to  the  hypnotic  influence  which 
the  Okkamist  doctrine  of  salvation  had  up  to  this  time 
exerted  upon  his  thinking.  He  recognized  that  it  was 
possible  to  judge  quite  differently  about  God,  man, 
sin  and  grace  than  the  "Invincible  Doctor"  and  was 
thereby  not  a  little  encouraged  to  throw  overboard 
the  old  theories  of  his  school. 

Is  this  the  only  service  which  Augustine  and  Mys- 
ticism rendered  Luther  at  this  j  uncture  ?  The  answer 
to  this  question  is  found  in  the  fact  that  at  the  time 
(1508-14)  he  learned  to  know  not  only  Augustine's 
Mystic  philosophy,  but  also  his  teachings  about  sin 
and  grace,  and  further,  in  the  circumstance  that  the 
Mystics  who  most  deeply  affected  him  were  two  of  a 
pronounced  Christian  type:  Bernard  of  Clairvaux 
and  John  von  Staupitz. 

Though  Luther  did  not  himself  become  clearly  con- 
scious of  it,  Augustine,  after  1509,  became  ever  more 
the  standard  of  his  views  on  salvation.  In  1513, 
therefore,  at  the  beginning  of  his  lectures  on  the 
Psalms  he  stood  much  closer  to  Augustine  than  to 
Okkam  on  this  point.  But  not  until  some  time  in  1515 
after  he  had  read  Augustine's  treatise  on  the  Letter 
and  the  Spirit  did  he  succeed  in  overcoming  the  last 
vestige  of  Okkam's  doctrine  on  salvation  which  re- 
mained in  his  thinking,  and  thus  finally  vanquish  ut- 
terly the  "Invincible  Doctor." 

Augustine,  however,  was  by  no  means  the  only  ally 
of  Luther  in  the  long  and  desperate  struggle  with 
Okkam  and  his  school.    As  early  as  1505-07  two  other 


LUTHER'S  HELPERS  AND  GUIDES  99 

advisers,  Bernard  of  Clairvaux  and  John  von  Stau- 
pitz,  stood  by  him.  The  former  (he  died  in  1153) 
though  by  conviction  an  adherent  of  Mystic  specula- 
tion and  especially  in  his  theological  writings  a  zeal- 
ous advocate  of  the  common  Catholic  views  on  good 
works,  the  law,  the  meritorious  value  of  ascetic  prac- 
tices by  the  monks,  nevertheless  manifested  certain 
Evangelical  elements  in  his  religious  attitude.  Oc- 
casionally he  looked  upon  forgiveness  of  sin  as  the 
supreme  blessing.  At  times  he  praised  justification 
through  faith  alone  and  in  so  doing  clearly  conceived 
justification  as  the  foundation  of  a  new  relationship 
between  God  and  man  on  the  strength  of  which  God 
no  longer  charged  sin  to  the  account  of  man,  though 
the  sinner  might  not  yet  have  overcome  his  sin.  On 
occasion,  Bernard,  also  therefore  like  Luther,  re- 
garded penance  in  the  celebrated  opening  thesis  in  the 
Ninety-five  as  a  moral  process  of  purification  which 
continued  through  the  whole  life  of  the  converted 
person.  Once,  in  fact,  he  insisted  quite  in  the  manner 
of  the  later  Luther:  It  is  not  sufficient  merely  to  be- 
lieve in  a  general  way  that  God  pardons  sin,  you  must 
also  believe  that  he  forgives  you  personally.  Above 
all  Bernard  continually  pointed  to  the  cross  of  Christ 
as  the  incontrovertible  proof  of  the  compassionate 
love  of  God  for  sinful  mankind  and  over  and  over 
emphatically  designated  humility  which  is  conscious 
of  no  merit  and  constant  sorrow  over  sin  as  the  fitting 
attitude  and  sentiment  of  man  in  his  intercourse  with 
God. 

In  view  of  these  facts  it  is  easy  to  understand  why 


100  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

Bernard  very  early  made  an  impression  upon  Luther. 
The  words:  you  must  also  believe  that  God  has  for- 
given you  personally,  were  forcibly  called  to  the  at- 
tention of  the  perturbed  young  monk  by  the  master 
of  novices  of  the  Augustinians  at  Erfurt  in  1505-06 
and  directly  lodged  in  his  soul  to  remain  there  un- 
f orgotten  throughout  his  life  as  the  first  bit  of  consola- 
tion which  had  comforted  him  in  his  misery.  With 
equal  force  he  was  influenced  by  Bernard's  continual 
reference  to  the  cross  of  Christ,  for  the  more  he  fol- 
lowed this  direction,  the  more  the  bleeding  head  and 
wounded  side  dislodged  from  his  religious  conscious- 
ness the  terrible  picture  of  the  Judge  of  the  world 
seated  upon  a  rainbow,  the  more  certain  he  grew  of  the 
incomprehensible  fact  of  the  compassionate  love  of 
God  for  the  sinner,  the  more  firm  also,  on  the  other 
hand,  waxed  in  him  the  knowledge  that  sin  is  the  direst 
of  evils  and  that  it  were  blasphemy  to  persist  in  speak- 
ing of  merits  and  good  works  in  the  face  of  the  cruci- 
fied Saviour. 

These  new  convictions,  however,  came  to  be  his 
permanent  property  only  during  the  intimate  personal 
association  with  a  genuine  disciple  of  Bernard,  John 
von  Staupitz,  Vicar  of  the  order.  Staupitz  himself, 
in  his  last  letter  to  Luther,  explicitly  confessed  that 
"alone  Brother  Martin  had  led  him  from  the  husks  of 
the  swine  to  the  pasture  of  life."  Nevertheless,  there 
was  a  time  when  conversely  the  Vicar  was  the  guide  of 
Brother  Martin.  He  led  Luther  along  exactly  the 
same  paths  as  Bernard,  however.  Ever  again  he 
pointed  the  young  monk  to  the  wounds  of  Christ  as 


LUTHER'S  HELPERS  AND  GUIDES  101 

the  great  proof  of  the  love  of  God;  he  encouraged 
him  to  cHng  with  his  whole  soul  to  this  overpowering 
revelation  of  the  true  sentiment  of  God  and  urged 
him  to  stop  the  useless  speculations  about  predestina- 
tion. On  the  other  hand  he  admonished  him  to  accus- 
tom himself  to  the  thought  that  he  was  in  truth  and 
reality  a  sinner,  and  above  all  convinced  Luther  that 
he  must  cease  torturing  and  tormenting  himself  in 
accordance  with  the  prescription  of  Biel  in  the  en- 
deavor to  gradually  transform  his  natural  self-love 
into  the  pure  love  of  God  by  a  systematic  training  of 
his  ideas  and  feelings.  He  did  this  by  calling  to  the 
attention  of  the  young  monk  the  words  "which  re- 
mained fixed  in  his  soul  as  the  arrow  of  a  mighty  one" : 
the  love  of  God  and  of  righteousness  is  not  the  end 
but  the  beginning  of  true  penance.  In  this  wise  the 
desperate  young  man  in  his  associations  with  Staupitz 
learned  to  know  God  from  an  entirely  different  angle 
from  that  which  had  been  presented  to  him  in  the 
school  of  Okkam.  Simultaneously  he  was  freed  from 
the  futile  self-torture  which  he  had  so  far  assiduously 
practised  in  order  that  he  might  wrest  from  himself 
true  love  of  God  and  true  penitence. 

Despite  all,  however,  Staupitz  was  unable  to  en- 
tirely free  Luther  from  his  tribulations.  Brother 
Martin's  fear  of  sin  appeared  quite  unintelligible, 
indeed  absurd,  also  to  his  patron,  for  the  Vicar  himself 
did  not  regard  sin  in  such  a  serious  light,  and  the  mys- 
terious striving  of  the  young  monk  for  personal  as- 
surance of  forgiveness  he  failed  utterly  to  compre- 
hend, because  his  own  convictions  on  this  point  were 


102  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

the  orthodox  Catholic  ones.  In  full  agreement  with 
St.  Bernard  he  deemed  it  impious  even  to  pray  for 
such  assurance.  But,  though  he  did  not  understand 
Brother  Martin,  Staupitz,  nevertheless,  without 
coddling,  always  made  Luther  feel  his  high  personal 
regard  for  him,  and  his  willingness  to  assist  him.  The 
lonesome  young  man  who  still  associated  with  the 
word  father  the  idea  of  unbending  severity  and  strict- 
ness which  life  in  th*^  paternal  home  had  taught  him 
thus  for  the  first  time  came  to  know  a  father's  love, 
and  that  was  perhaps  of  even  greater  moment  for  his 
psychic  condition  than  all  the  comforting  directions 
and  knowledge  which  he  owed  to  the  pious  Vicar. 

Staupitz  and  Bernard  stood  by  the  Reformer  in  the 
hardest  years  of  his  development.  Later  on  a  number 
of  other  'Mystics  crossed  his  path,  among  them  Bona- 
ventura  and  Gerson,  and  besides  the  two  Dutchmen, 
John  Mauburnus  and  Gerard  Zerbolt  von  Zuetphen 
who  so  profoundly  impressed  also  his  great  antipode 
Inigo  Loyola.  A  short  time  only  before  Luther  en- 
tered the  lists,  at  the  end  of  1515  or  the  beginning  of 
1516,  he  further  made  the  close  acquaintance  of  two  of 
the  great  German  Mystics  of  the  fourteenth  century, 
John  Tauler  and  the  so-called  Frankfurt  Anonymous, 
the  author  of  the  "German  Theology."  He  forthwith 
recommended  the  former  to  his  students  as  an  excel- 
lent German  religious  writer.  The  latter  he  himself 
edited,  in  an  incomplete  form  in  1516  and  completely 
in  1518,  confessing  that  outside  of  the  Bible  and  St. 
Augustine  he  had  found  no  other  book  which  had 
taught  him  more  about  the  nature  of  God,  Christ, 
man  and  all  things. 


LUTHER'S  HELPERS  AND  GUIDES  103 

This  enthusiastic  verdict  is  responsible  for  a  whole 
literature.  Even  to-day  a  considerable  group  of 
scholars  on  the  basis  of  it  assert:  "Not  until  he  met 
the  Frankfurt  Mystic  did  Luther  develop  from  a 
despairing  struggler  in  a  dark  sea  into  a  Reformer." 
(H.  Biittner)  Mandel  says:  "As  a  reforming  theo- 
logian Luther  is  a  pupil  of  Tauler  and  the  Frankfurt 
Anonymous,"  hence  his  conversion  occurred  in  the 
period  when  he  came  to  know  these  two  old  seekers 
after  God.  "German  Mysticism  is  the  cradle  of  the 
Reformation"  and  similar  statements  abound.  The 
proof  for  this  weighty  assertion  these  students  have 
always  magnanimously  left  to  the  common  hod  car- 
riers of  the  historical  profession.  Are  the  historians 
in  the  happy  position  of  being  able  to  provide  the  nec- 
essary confirmatory  evidence  for  these  rather  large 
contentions  ?  Unfortunately  not.  Luther  had  at  the 
end  of  1515  long  ago  ceased  to  be  "a  despairing  strug- 
gler in  a  dark  sea."  His  new  religious  point  of  view 
was  at  that  time  already  fixed.  This  is  shown  by  the 
seven  first  chapters  of  his  lectures  on  Romans  at  every 
point.  He  had  by  this  time  also  begun  his  reforma- 
tory criticism  of  conditions  in  the  Church.  Only  one 
thing  he  still  lacked,  the  clear  recognition  that  the 
faithful  Christian  not  alone  dared  be  sure  of  his  sal- 
vation, but  that  he  must  be  certain  of  it. 

What  then  was  it  that  so  strongly  attracted  him  to 
Tauler  and  the  Frankfurt  Anonymous?  Was  it  the 
pantheistic  speculation  which  he  found  there?  No, 
that  was  not  new  to  him  any  more.  These  specula- 
tions were  neither  a  pecuhar  feature  of  German  Mys- 


104  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

ticism,  let  alone  the  last  forceful  manifestation  of  the 
ancient  Germanic  religion  over  against  the  "domi- 
ciled Hebraizing  worship  of  foreign  gods."  This  trait 
the  German  Mystics  held  in  common  with  all  other 
Mj''stics  of  Germanic,  Romanic,  Slavic,  Semitic,  Per- 
sian, Hindoo,  Greek  and  Chinese  origin.  What  at- 
tracted Luther  were  naturally  those  phases  which  are 
peculiar  to  these  two  seekers  after  God,  the  things 
that  were  new  to  him.  What  was  the  character  of 
these  captivating  novelties  ?  He  answers  this  question 
himself  as  plainly  as  possible  in  the  passage  of  the 
lectures  on  Romans  where  he  first  mentions  and  lauds 
Tauler,  furthermore,  in  the  resolution  of  the  fifteenth 
of  the  Ninety-five  Theses  where  in  part  he  almost 
verbally  uses  the  eleventh  chapter  of  the  German  The- 
ology, and  indirectly  besides  in  the  marginals  to  his 
personal  copy  of  the  sermons  of  Tauler.  No  other 
sermon  in  this  volume  is  so  heavily  underscored  and 
so  profusely  glossed  as  the  one  which  he  had  in  mind 
during  the  lectures  on  Romans  and  which  in  its  whole 
content  shows  close  relationship  to  the  eleventh  chap- 
ter of  the  German  Theology. 

What  do  Tauler  and  the  Frankfurt  Anonymous  dis- 
cuss in  these  passages  which  were  so  important  for 
Luther  ?  They  treat  exhaustively  of  internal  tribula- 
tion, the  sense  of  oppression,  the  distress,  fear  and 
unrest,  the  despair  and  com2:)lete  inner  collapse  which 
normally  precede  the  rebirth  or  the  regeneration  in 
God.  For,  as  the  soul  of  Christ  first  descended  into 
hell  and  only  after  that  ascended  to  heaven,  so  man 
also  must  first  experience  the  torments  of  one  who 


LUTHER'S  HELPERS  AND  GUIDES  105 

feels  himself  completely  forsaken  before  he  can  taste 
of  the  peace,  happiness,  delight  and  pleasure  of  the 
eternal  God.  In  this  hell  nothing  pains  man  more  than 
his  own  sin  and  wickedness,  and  nothing  can  console 
him  on  that  score.  One  thing  only  will  avail,  to  let  the 
wound  fester  out,  to  bear  patiently  the  visitation  of 
God.  Man  gets  into  this  state  of  torment  without 
knowing  why  and  without  having  given  cause  for  it 
by  his  own  deeds  or  omissions.  His  desperate  condi- 
tion is  God's  visitation  upon  him.  From  this  in  itself 
follows  that  all  is  not  well  with  man  until  he  feels 
disconsolate  and  desperate,  or  until  he  feels  happy 
and  joyful  in  God.  For  even  in  these  sore  tribula- 
tions he  is  not  forsaken  by  God  as  he  imagines.  He 
is  that  only  if  he  himself  abandons  God,  busies  him- 
self with  created  things  and  flits  hither  and  thither 
in  doubt  without  knowing  to  whom  he  belongs.  But 
why  does  God  lead  especially  his  chosen  people  such 
wondrous  ways?  Because  he  wants  to  drive  out  of 
man  pride  and  arrogance,  the  wish  to  be  somebody, 
and  wants  to  show  him  that  he  must  give  himself  up 
to  God  in  unrestricted  humility  whether  it  be  for  sal- 
vation or  damnation. 

This  was  the  new  doctrine  which  Luther  found  in 
Tauler  and  the  Frankfurtian.  Why  did  it  mean  so 
much  to  him  ?  In  the  first  place,  because  it  gave  him 
the  firm  conviction  that  every  man  whom  God  saves 
must  pass  through  the  hell  of  pangs  of  conscience; 
secondly,  because  in  it  he  again  found  the  knowledge 
confirmed  that  man  has  no  other  alternative  than  to 
give  himself  up  unconditionally  to  God  for  life  and 


106  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

death  and  to  wholly  rehnquish  all  idea  of  personal 
choice ;  thirdly,  because  he  clearly  saw  from  this  doc- 
trine that  the  path  he  had  himself  trodden  was  not  a 
false  one,  nor  a  roundabout  way,  but  that  it  was  the 
direct  road  to  salvation,  and  that  he  himself  had  al- 
ready been  "safe"  in  God  while  he  was  experiencing 
his  hours  of  greatest  inner  tribulation.  From  this 
necessarily  followed  also  the  conviction  with  reference 
to  the  future  that  he  need  not  and  dare  not  allow  new 
temptations  to  rob  him  of  the  blessed  feeling  of  "se- 
curity in  God." 

It  is,  therefore,  not  accidental  that  only  after  his 
acquaintance  with  Tauler  and  the  Frankfurtian  Lu- 
ther ventured  freely  and  openly  to  confess  that  the 
believer  must  feel  certain  of  his  salvation,  for  only 
after  this  had  the  doubts  which  so  far  had  held  him 
back  from  this  assurance  been  set  at  naught.  Now 
he  was  unable  further  to  feel  that  it  was  a  precept  of 
humility  to  doubt  God's  everlasting  gracious  provi- 
dence, now  he  no  more  needed  to  fear  that  ignorance 
and  frivolity  v/ould  abuse  this  knowledge,  for  now  he 
could  always  sober  a  frivolous  person  by  asking 
whether  he  had  already  passed  through  the  hell  of 
despair.  This  all  enables  us  to  comprehend  why  in 
the  next  years  he  places  Tauler  and  the  Frankfurt 
Anonymous  as  the  best  theologians  right  after  Paul 
and  Augustine.  Though  they  were  not  the  first  to 
teach  him  what  God,  Christ,  man  and  all  things  were, 
he  yet  owed  to  them  the  clear  insight  into  the  apparent 
tangle  of  his  own  development  and  thereby  liberation 
from  the  last  scruples  and  doubts  about  the  blessed 


LUTHER'S  HELPERS  AND  GUIDES  107 

knowledge  that  he  could  and  must  feel  absolutely 
certain  of  his  God.  He  did  not  by  any  means  find 
this  knowledge  in  a  ready  and  complete  form  in  these 
two  old  men  of  God.  He  had  to  arrive  at  and  win  it 
independently,  but  they  indirectly  helped  him  to  suc- 
ceed by  making  the  unfolding  of  his  own  religious  life 
clear  to  him. 

Luther's  growth,  therefore,  also  confirms  the  old 
truth  that  the  human  spirit  like  a  plant  absorbs  from 
its  environment  only  the  nourishment  which  agrees 
with  its  nature:  "modern"  theology  and  philosophy 
the  old  monastic  teaching  on  humility  and  of  the  per- 
fect love  of  God,  the  Neoplatonic  speculations  of  Au- 
gustine and  the  Pseudo-Dionysius,  the  doctrines  of 
Augustine  about  sin  and  grace,  the  edificatory  reflec- 
tions of  Bernard  of  Clairvaux,  Tauler  and  the  Frank- 
furt Anonymous,  the  personal  counsel  and  encourage- 
ment of  Jolm  von  Staupitz — all  these  had  to  serve  his 
growth  without,  however,  at  any  time  enslaving  him, 
or  forcing  him  from  the  path  upon  which  undeterred 
he  advanced  toward  a  goal  unknown  to  himself. 

At  first,  to  be  sure,  it  did  seem  as  though  Luther 
were  entirely  under  the  domination  of  modern  philoso- 
phy and  theology,  as  though  his  whole  feehng  and 
thinking  were  governed  by  the  old  ideal  of  the  monas- 
tery and  by  the  desire  to  transform  natural  self-love 
by  a  radical  cm-e  after  the  prescription  of  Biel  into 
pure  love  of  God.  Gradually,  however,  with  the  aid  of 
Neoplatonic  speculation,  Augustine's  doctrine  of 
grace,  the  religious  convictions  of  Bernard  and  of 
Staupitz,  he  mastered  the  Okkamistic  notions  about 


108  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

God,  man  and  salvation,  and  at  the  same  time  Biel's 
teaching  of  the  amenabihty  of  natural  self-love  to  the 
process  of  ennobilization.  Simultaneously,  however, 
with  the  aid  of  the  critical  work  of  Okkam  and  his 
school  on  the  dogma,  he  escaped  the  pernicious  grasp 
of  fantastic  mystical  speculations  and  the  massive 
concepts  of  the  Augustinian  doctrine  of  salvation. 
Furthermore,  he  made  Okkam  furnish  him  the  formu- 
las and  concepts  for  his  new  views  on  sin,  grace,  justi- 
fication and  penance.  Barely  had  he  completed  this 
long  and  silent  struggle  in  which  his  opponents  and 
allies  continually  changed,  when  once  more  Mysticism, 
as  represented  by  Tauler  and  the  Frankfurtian,  was 
made  to  assist  him  in  severing  the  last  ties  which  still 
connected  his  new  attitude  toward  religion  with  the 
old  faith.  And  contrary  to  their  own  convictions  as 
well  to  the  tenets  of  ancient  p.nd  mediaeval  theology, 
they  had  to  aid  him  in  arriving  at  the  conclusion  that 
the  faithful  Christian  can  and  must  be  certain  of  his 
salvation. 

The  ideal  which  Luther  thus  acquired  in  the  main 
still  corresponds  to  the  ideal  with  which  he  in  1505  had 
entered  into  this  inner  conflict.  It  still  was  an  answer 
to  the  old  question:  How  will  I  attain  complete  de- 
votion to  God?  But  his  opinions  about  the  way  to 
this  goal,  and  his  ideas  on  the  relationship  between 
God  and  man  had  in  the  mean  time  undergone  a  revo- 
lution which  in  its  kind  was  as  momentous  and  full  of 
consequences  as  that  wrought  by  the  discoveries  of 
Copernicus  in  the  views  about  the  sun,  moon  and  stars. 
While  in  1505  his  own  ego  still  had  seemed  to  him  an 


LUTHER'S  HELPERS  AND  GUIDES  109 

independent  center  of  inexhaustible  energy  which  ever 
moved  freely  in  its  own  orbit  without  at  any  time  re- 
quiring an  external  impetus,  it  now  was  to  him  only  a 
small  dependent  star  which  without  proper  motion  cir- 
cles about  the  immense  sun,  God,  and  must  receive 
from  this  sovereign  luminary  all  energy  and  all  light 
in  order  that  it  might  illumine  itself  and  others.  Thus, 
while  formerly  he  had  expected  everything  from  his 
own  personal  will  and  effort,  he  now  hoped  for  all 
from  the  power  and  mercy  of  God. 

It  is  evident  that  in  this  revolution  of  his  thoughts, 
next  to  Paul  and  Augustine  the  greatest  influence  was 
exercised  by  Mysticism.  But  is  it  permissible  for 
this  reason  to  regard  his  religious  point  of  view  merely 
as  a  development  from  Mystic  piety  ?  No.  The  Mys- 
tic is  content  with  the  consciousness  of  his  dependence 
on  God,  with  the  duty  of  patiently  bearing  the  visita- 
tions of  God,  and  with  the  enjoyment  of  God.  What- 
ever activity  Mysticism  contains  is  completely  used  up 
by  the  task  of  bringing  about  this  condition  in  which 
the  will  is  as  it  were  switched  off.  With  Luther  it  is 
not  merely  a  question  of  passive  suffering,  but  a  ques- 
tion of  experiencing  God  in  a  manner  which  requires 
of  all  forces  of  the  soul  a  passionate  tension.  It  is 
with  the  Reformer  not  a  mere  matter  of  an  apathetic 
attitude,  but  of  an  active  and  joyous  feeling  of  trust 
and  faith  which  in  its  nature  is  not  rest,  but  "a  live, 
busy,  active,  mighty  thing,"  a  continual  driving  im- 
pulse to  do  what  is  good.  Therefore  any  attempts  to 
derive  his  views  from  any  specific  earlier  doctrine  or 
form  of  piety  have  always  failed.    For  no  matter  how 


110  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

much  his  whole  course  of  development  seems  to  be  con- 
ditioned by  late  mediseval  theology  and  philosophy, 
by  Augustine  and  Mysticism,  the  final  product  is  in  no 
way  the  logical  result  of  these  several  educational  fac- 
tors, but  is  something  new  and  original,  something 
that  had  never  existed  before,  for  the  explanation  of 
which  one  must  always  again  point  to  a  wholly  un- 
commensurable  quantity:  the  personal  peculiarity  of 
the  Reformer. 

Luther's  whole  course  of  development  is  just  as 
original  as  the  result,  if  measured  by  the  career  of 
other  heroes  of  Christian  piety.  He  does  not  attain 
calmness  and  clarity  as  August  Hermann  Franke  in 
the  space  of  a  few  hours,  or  like  Loyola  after  a  few 
hard  weeks — it  takes  him  about  eight  years.  Also  he 
never  has  a  peculiar  experience  during  this  period  like 
other  pious  individuals,  he  hears  no  voices  like  George 
Fox,  has  no  "photisma"  (visions  of  light)  and  visions 
like  Loyola,  he  does  not  experience  a  moral  collapse 
like  Augustine  or  John  Wesley,  he  does  nothing  more 
than  other  monks  do,  he  prays,  meditates  and  studies. 
Even  his  "conversion,"  therefore,  has  not  in  the  least 
an  air  of  romance  about  it,  for  it  consists  in  nothing 
more  than  the  sudden  comprehension  of  a  concept  of 
Pauline  theology  which  hundreds  before  him  had  al- 
ready correctly  understood. 

Like  his  conversion  the  clarification  of  his  new 
knowledge  also  proceeds  altogether  in  the  quiet  of  his 
cell,  without  convulsing  external  or  moral  catastro- 
phes, without  any  change  in  his  mode  of  life  or  form  of 
activity.    Luther  goes  right  on  praying,  meditating 


LUTHER'S  HELPERS  AND  GUIDES  111 

and  studying,  only  he  perhaps  studies  even  harder 
than  before.  For  it  was  impossible  for  him  to  get  a 
firm  grasp  on  the  new  knowledge  unless  he  gained 
freedom  from  the  old  Okkamistic  doctrine  of  salvation 
which  was  stamped  upon  his  whole  inner  life,  and  un- 
less in  addition  he  gradually  acquired  an  altogether 
new  theology. 

How  much  industry,  what  a  tremendous  amount  of 
intellectual  energy  was  necessary  for  the  attainment 
of  this  end  can  in  a  measure  be  gauged  only  if  follow- 
ing his  footsteps  one  personally  studies  all  the  folios 
and  quartos  which  he  read  in  these  years  and  allows 
the  truly  confounding  variety  of  views  they  contain 
to  act  upon  oneself,  and  if  one  at  the  same  time  en- 
deavors to  understand  all  the  highly  complicated  con- 
cepts and  subtle  arguments  with  which  the  Okkamists, 
for  example,  operate.  Only  one  of  the  great  repre- 
sentatives of  Christianity  before  Luther  was  similarly 
forced  to  perform  and  did  perform  so  tremendous  a 
task,  the  Christian  whose  development  can  most  read- 
ily be  compared  with  his  own,  the  Apostle  Paul. 

However,  Luther  was  not  alone  a  religious  thinker 
and  character,  he  was  also  a  Reformer.  The  question 
arises,  is  he  as  original  and  independent  in  this  ca- 
pacity as  in  that  of  religious  thinker?  Is  the  Luther 
who  casts  the  bull  of  excommunication  into  the  flames, 
who  as  spokesman  of  the  nation  places  himself  at  the 
head  of  the  national  movement  away  from  Rome,  and 
who  with  incomparable  audacity  and  openness  pro- 
nounces on  all  the  great  and  small  issues  of  the  time 
like  a  prophet,  is  that  Luther  only  the  more  mature 


112  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

brother  of  the  monk,  who  like  a  true  fighting  theo- 
logian fights  only  with  theologians,  or  did  this  young 
champion  develop  into  a  reformer  only  under  the 
educative  influence  of  freer  and  stronger  spirits,  into 
the  sphere  of  whose  power  he  came  since  about  the 
end  of  1519? 

This  question  also  has  engrossed  the  attention  of 
scholars  and  has  called  forth  very  different  answers. 
Some  see  no  problem  here  at  all;  to  others  the  Re- 
former Luther  is  but  the  docile  pupil  of  Ulrich  von 
Hutten*  and  of  his  friend  Crotus  Rubeanus,  the  chief 
author  of  the  Letters  of  the  Obscure  Men.  Even  to- 
day it  is  still  claimed  that  not  until  after  his  associa- 
tion with  these  revolutionary  patriots  did  the  young 
monk  who  knew  nothing  of  the  world  discover  his 
German*  heart,  that  their  example  alone  encouraged 
him  to  appeal  to  the  whole  nation?  They  say,  the 
spirit  of  Hutten  and  his  challenging  boldness  speaks 
in  the  lines  of  the  great  reformatory  writings  of  1520. 
Indeed,  they  claim  that  the  most  powerful  of  all  of 
these,  the  Address  to  the  Nobility,  is  nothing  more 
than  an  extract  from  Hutten's  great  satire  Vadiscus, 
or  "Trias  Romana,"  and  that  it  is  at  the  same  time  the 
documentary  proof  for  Luther's  connection  with  the 
"Hutten-Sickingen  Revolutionary  Party."  Evi- 
dences for  this  contention  are  seemingly  not  lacking, 
but  the  question  is :  Are  the  methods  of  proof  flawless, 
and  are  the  facts  which  are  cited  always  correctly  in- 
terpreted ? 


*  Ulrich  von  Hutten  was  notorious  for  his  loose  morals.  The 
detractors  of  Luther  group  him  here  with  von  Hutten  and  apply  to 
the  latter  an  epithet  which  is  perfectly  correct,  but  which  in  the 
translation  we  have  omitted. 


LUTHER'S  HELPERS  AND  GUIDES  113 

A  cursory  glance  into  the  lectures  on  Romans  and 
into  the  sermons  of  the  monk  Luther  from  the  period 
of  1513-17  suffices  to  show  that  the  monk  "who  knew 
nothing  of  the  world"  even  then  knew  the  world  quite 
well,  and  that  Luther  the  Reformer  was  already  in  the 
field,  though  for  the  present  he  was  content  to  use  the 
lecture  platform  and  the  pulpit  as  his  rostrum.  In 
these  sermons  he  undismayed  attacks  the  excres- 
cences of  saint- worship  and  the  indulgences.  In  the 
lectures,  as  we  have  seen  above,  he  very  frankly  states 
his  opinion  on  all  sorts  of  evils  in  Church  and  society, 
indeed,  he  is  no  longer  satisfied  with  mere  criticism, 
he  sets  up  quite  a  list  of  definite  demands  for  reform. 
Simultaneously  he  begins  to  take  a  stand  over  against 
the  problem  of  nationality.  He  keenly  deplores  the 
fact  that  so  often  the  peoples  in  their  disputes  and 
jealousies  forget  that  they  are  Christians.  Mean- 
while he  notes  with  a  certain  satisfaction  that  the 
Greeks  had  been  even  greater  gluttons  than  were  the 
Germans  of  his  day.  He  further  shows  the  warmest 
admiration  and  sympathy  for  his  ruler  Frederick  the 
Wise.  Three  years  later,  in  June,  1518,  he  assails  the 
supercilious  and  overbearing  attitude  of  the  foreign- 
ers toward  the  German  theologians,  and  with  refer- 
ence to  the  "German  Theology"  he  expresses  the  hope 
that  his  countrymen  might  some  day  still  be  recog- 
nized generally  as  the  foremost  theologians. 

For  the  present,  however,  he  was  destined  to  expe- 
rience personally  how  far  the  Italians  dared  to  go  in 
their  presumption  over  against  a  German.  The 
Italian  Dominican,   Sylvester  da  Prierio,  attacked 


114  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

him  as  a  leper  and  a  dog  in  an  unspeakably  superfi- 
cial and  arrogant  treatise.  From  the  moment  when 
this  "typically  Italian  product"  came  to  his  hands 
(August,  1518)  he  feels  the  contrast  between  Italian 
and  German  just  as  strongly  and  gives  it  just  as  un- 
disguised expression  as  Ulrich  von  Hutten.  In  Oc- 
tober, 1518,  he  publicly  chastizes  the  Roman  Church's 
insatiable  thirst  for  gold.  In  December  he  voices  the 
suspicion  that  Antichrist  is  ruling  at  the  Curia.  In 
February,  1519,  he  even  calls  Rome  a  Babylon  and 
declares  angrily:  "We  Germans  alone  have  helped 
the  popes  to  the  limit  of  our  power.  As  a  punishment 
we  have  had  to  endure  them  as  masters  in  anathema- 
tization and  flaying  and  now  also  in  the  exploitation 
of  archdioceses  and  bishoprics."  At  the  same  time  he 
gives  in  the  prologue  to  his  commentary  on  Galatians 
a  veritable  prelude  for  his  Address  to  the  Nobility: 
"These  ungodly  windbags,  Prierias,  Cajetan  and  their 
fellows,  abuse  us  as  German  blockheads,  beasts  and 
barbarians,  and  deride  the  unbelievable  patience  with 
which  we  permit  ourselves  to  be  deceived  and  plun- 
dered. Praise  be  therefore  to  the  German  princes 
who  recently  at  Augsburg  (1518)  refused  the  Roman 
Curia  the  tenth,  the  twentieth  and  the  fiftieth,  though 
they  were  aware  that  the  most  accursed  Roman  coun- 
cil had  sanctioned  these  taxes.  They  recognized  that 
pope  and  council  had  erred,  .  .  .  that  the  legates  of 
the  Curia  are  only  looking  for  money  and  nothing  but 
money.  The  example  of  these  lay-theologians,  there- 
fore, is  most  worthy  of  emulation  ...  it  is  evidence 
of  a  greater  piety  if  princes,  and  whoever  else  it  may 


LUTHER'S  HELPERS  AND  GUIDES  115 

be,  opposed  the  Curia  than  if  they  took  the  field 
against  the  Turks."  Surely,  one  who  dared  to  wi-ite 
publicly  in  this  strain  a  whole  year  before  Hutten 
sounded  the  trumpet  of  battle  does  not  first  need  to 
borrow  national  anger  and  pathos  from  Hutten,  or  be 
inspired  with  courage  by  a  writer  of  the  caliber  of 
Crotus  Rubeanus  who  at  bottom  of  his  soul  was  cow- 
ardly and  without  conviction. 

However,  if  accordingly  the  patriot  Luther  had 
been  long  in  the  field  when  Hutten  declared  war  upon 
Rome,  and  though  the  challenging  boldness  and  re- 
gardlessness  of  this  German  beast  was  offensive  to  the 
Italians  and  a  joy  to  the  Germans  when  the  people 
still  knew  nothing  of  Hutten,  this  does  not  exclude  the 
possibility  that  the  patriotic  monk  in  later  years 
learned  from  Hutten  and  Crotus  Rubeanus.  The  lat- 
ter, in  fact,  since  October,  1519,  wrote  long  letters  to 
Luther.  The  Reformer,  however,  nowhere  refers  to 
their  contents.  Manifestly  they  made  no  deep  im- 
pression on  him.  Hutten  did  not  approach  Luther 
until  February,  1520.  At  this  early  date  he  already 
offered  him,  through  the  mediation  of  Melanchthon, 
the  protection  of  Franz  von  Sickingen.  In  April  he 
renewed  this  proposal,  and  finally  in  July  he  for  the 
first  time  addressed  himself  to  Luther  in  person,  and 
forthwith  proposed  to  him  a  regular  alliance.  Even 
this  enthusiastic  missive,  however,  did  not  result  in  a 
more  lively  intercourse  between  the  two  men.  We 
know  only  four  letters  of  Hutten  to  the  Reformer  and 
only  four  letters  of  Luther  to  Hutten.  The  latter, 
therefore,  was  quite  right  when,  in  the  spring  of  1523, 


116  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

he  asserted  that  Luther  had  never  been  his  confeder- 
ate. But  he  neglected  to  mention  that  he  himself  had 
very  earnestly  though  always  wholly  in  vain  sought  for 
Luther's  alliance.  The  ostensible  confederacy  of  the 
Reformer  with  the  "Hutten-Sickingen  Reform 
Party"  is,  therefore,  nothing  more  than  a  legend,  or — 
to  use  a  favorite  term  of  Luther's — a  lie-gend,  a  tra- 
dition which  is  not  rendered  more  trustworthy  by  the 
fact  that  it  was  current  in  the  camp  of  Luther's  ad- 
versaries as  early  as  1521.  This  venerable  age  it 
shares  with  many  other  legends  about  Luther. 

Even  so  the  contact  with  Hutten  did  not  remain 
without  abiding  results  either  for  Luther  or  for  Hut- 
ten.  On  the  contrary,  both  men  doubtless  learned 
from  each  other.  As  soon  as  Luther  enters  Hutten's 
horizon  the  Frankish  knight  suddenly  strikes  a  dif- 
ferent note  in  his  writings.  The  Humanist  becomes 
a  national  publicist,  the  celebrated  Latinist  learns  to 
"svrite  German  and  to  compose  poetry  in  the  language 
of  his  country,  the  frivolous  poet  suddenly  places  the 
full  extent  of  his  wild  passion  and  extraordinary  tal- 
ent into  the  service  of  the  national  movement  away 
from  Rome  and  the  pagan  scoffer  condescends  to  read 
the  Bible  and  talks  like  a  pious  Lutheran. 

The  Reformer  is  indebted  to  Hutten  above  all  for 
the  publication  of  Lorenzo  di  Valla's  treatise  on  the 
forged  Donation  of  Constantine.  The  reading  of 
this  work  made  an  immense  impression  on  him.  Since 
then  he  felt  quite  convinced  that  the  Pope  was  the 
Antichrist.  He  was  much  less  able  to  profit  from 
Hutten's  other  writings  against  Rome,  dated  Febru- 


LUTHER'S  HELPERS  AND  GUIDES  117 

ary  and  March,  1520.  He  certainly  read  them  before 
he  undertook  to  write  his  Address  to  the  Christian 
Nobihty.  A  comparison  shows,  however,  that  he  had 
at  his  command  much  better  and  more  accurate  data 
about  the  "Roman  greed,  love  of  display  and  arro- 
gance" than  Hutten  was  able  to  offer  him.  There- 
fore he  did  not  at  all  need  to  excerpt  the  Vadiscus  as 
Hutten  could  tell  him  nothing  new,  the  enthusiastic 
applause  of  the  Frankish  knight  was  as  little  a  matter 
of  indifference  to  him  as  the  proposal  of  protection 
and  alliance  made  by  Franz  von  Sickingen  and  Sil- 
vester von  Schauenberg,  the  favorable  opinion  of 
Erasmus  and  other  Humanists,  the  encouraging  mes- 
sages of  the  Bohemian  IJtraquists,  the  growing  sym- 
pathy of  the  German  clergy  and  monks,  the  mighty 
stir  among  the  student  youth  and  the  news  of  the  in- 
creasing excitement  of  the  masses. 

From  all  these  storm  signals  he  saw  with  increasing 
clearness  that  he  was  not  standing  alone  but  that  his 
cause  had  become  the  concern  of  the  whole  nation. 
Ever  more  strongly  he  was  overcome  in  view  of  these 
events  with  the  mighty  sensation  that  the  people  as  a 
whole  were  preparing  to  rally  around  him.  In  view 
of  these  facts,  since  he  had  vainly  addi-essed  himself 
to  Pope  and  council,  the  impulse  grew  stronger  within 
him  to  appeal  to  his  people,  the  people  who  as  it 
seemed  were  only  waiting  for  him  to  issue  the  call  to 
arms.  In  such  a  frame  of  mind  he  after  June,  1520, 
wrote  his  powerful  manifesto  of  war  against  Rome, 
the  Address  to  the  Christian  Nobility.  In  it  he  by 
no  means  addresses  solely  the  knights,  he  speaks  to 


118  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

his  "dear  Germans"  generally.  Also  he  does  not  by 
any  chance  expect  the  reform  of  the  Christian  estate 
from  the  knights,  but  in  the  first  place  from  "the  noble 
blood,  Charles"  and  the  secular  princes,  from  those 
lay-theologians,  therefore,  whose  actions  he  had  ear- 
lier, in  September,  1519,  praised  so  highly.  For  to 
him  "nobihty"  signifies  not  only  the  knights,  barons 
and  counts,  but  the  whole  noble  class.  Only  in  the 
one  well-known  passage  of  his  treatise  where  he  ex- 
pressly sanctions  the  claims  of  the  younger  sons  of 
noblemen  to  the  benefices  of  the  great  religious  foun- 
dations of  the  Empire  is  it  permissible  to  see  a  refer- 
ence to  the  wishes  of  the  lesser  non-princely  nobles 
and  a  sort  of  thanks  for  the  magnanimous  promises 
of  Sickingen  and  Schauenberg.  Truly,  he  did  not 
need  to  make  use  of  the  "hundred  faithful  knights" 
whose  help  the  latter  had  held  out  to  him,  and  he  was 
able  to  decline  the  protection  of  Sickingen.  Never- 
theless, the  mere  fact  that  so  many  members  of  a  class 
which  just  then  was  once  more  beginning  to  show  en- 
ergetic signs  of  life,  and  which  was  still  quite  a  power, 
were  willing  to  answer  for  his  secm*ity,  filled  liim 
with  j  oyous  faith  in  the  victory  of  his  cause.  Further- 
more, it  freed  him  from  the  uncomfortable  duty  of  so 
closely  considering  the  timid  disposition  of  his  ruler, 
the  Elector  Frederick  the  Wise,  as  he  had  up  to  this 
time  been  forced  to  do. 

For  these  reasons,  therefore,  it  is  gross  exaggera- 
tion to  ascribe  the  transformation  of  Luther  from  a 
reforming  theologian  into  a  national  and  religious 
reformer  purely  to  the  influence  of  Hutten.    The  ob- 


LUTHER'S  HELPERS  AND  GUIDES  119 

servation  which  serves  as  the  basis  of  this  contention 
is  undoubtedly  correct.  The  Luther  of  1520  is  indeed 
a  different  person  from  the  Luther  of  the  Ninety-five 
Theses.  His  aims  are  grander,  his  view  much  broader 
and  clearer,  his  self-confidence  vastly  mightier.  But 
this  progress  is  not  the  work  of  Hutten,  it  is  the  result 
of  all  those  struggles  which  the  Reformer  had  had  to 
endure  since  1517  and  likewise  the  reaction  to  the  ever 
more  powerfully  growing  movement  which  had  al- 
ready begun  before  he  appeared  in  the  open.  Luther 
himself,  without  realizing  it,  was  in  its  service  since 
1517,  and  Hutten  also  after  the  last  months  of  1519 
had  given  himself  up  to  it  with  passionate  enthusiasm. 
Naturally  the  Reformer  did  not  become  clearly  aware 
of  the  ungaugeable  influence  of  public  opinion  upon 
his  development.  He  felt  the  current  carry  him  ever 
farther  on,  but  he  did  not  know  from  whence  the  flood 
of  waters  came.  With  all  the  greater  zeal  he  gave 
credit  to  his  opponents  especially  since  1519  for  be- 
ing his  teachers.  Indeed,  under  their  "paternal  and 
kindly  guidance"  he  had  been  led  onward  step  by 
step,  had  ever  more  clearly  come  to  know  himself,  un- 
til finally  he  was  absolutely  certain  of  his  call  and 
ceased  to  doubt  against  whom  he  would  have  to  battle: 
against  the  Antichrist  and  his  apostles. 


CHAPTER  IV. 

The  Beginning  of  the  Open  Conflict  With  the 
Old  Church. 

npHE  Protestant  world  celebrates  the  thirty-first 
-*■  of  October,  1517,  as  the  birthday  of  the  Reforma- 
tion. This  is  quite  justifiable,  but  easily  leads  to  the 
erroneous  idea  that  Luther's  opposition  to  the  authori- 
ties and  conditions  in  the  Church  of  his  time  did  not 
commence  until  then,  and  that  it  was  John  Tetzel  and 
the  Mayence  Indulgence  which  caused  him  to  issue  the 
battle  cry.  In  reality  he  had  entered  the  lists  long 
before.  Ever  since  1515  both  in  the  pulpit  and  in  his 
lectures- he  continually  criticized  with  steadily  increas- 
ing frankness  the  abuses  and  evils  in  all  fields  of  the 
religious  activity  of  the  Church.  However,  nothing 
was  heard  of  this  outside  of  Wittenberg.  Besides, 
Luther  personally  was  for  the  present  more  interested 
in  another  question  than  in  the  betterment  of  the 
Church,  his  attention  was  centered  upon  the  reform 
of  the  theological  curriculum. 

In  Wittenberg  Luther  had  already  in  the  middle  of 
the  year  1517  succeeded  in  breaking  the  sole  rule  of 
Scholasticism  and  in  making  the  study  of  the  Bible  the 
central  point  of  theological  instruction.  Now  he 
wished  to  smooth  the  way  for  this  reform  also  outside 
of  Wittenberg.  Thus  for  the  first  time  he  came  to 
issue  a  public  declaration  of  war,  the  Ninety-seven 
120 


BEGINNING  OF  THE  CONFLICT  121 

Theses,  against  Scholasticism  of  the  fourth  of  Sep- 
tember, 1517.  He  had  them  printed  and  sent  copies 
to  his  friends  in  Erfurt  and  Niirnberg,  he  even  dis- 
patched them  to  the  learned  and  clever  Dr.  Eck.  Then 
in  extraordinary  suspense  he  awaited  the  opinion  of 
the  academic  world.  But  the  expected  echo  failed  to 
materialize.  These  Ninety-seven  Theses,  which  Lu- 
ther himself  valued  so  highly,  are  to-day  known  only 
to  the  specialist.  Of  the  Ninety-five  Theses,  however, 
which  he  tacked  to  the  door  of  the  castle  church  at 
noon  on  the  thirty-first  of  October,  every  child  knows, 
though  he  did  not  submit  them  to  his  friends  until 
after  they  had  spread  through  almost  the  whole  of 
Germany.  Thus  strangely  in  this  case  also  the  words 
proved  true:  a  good  work  must  be  wrought  in  error 
and  ignorance. 

Well-known  though  the  Ninety-five  Theses  are,  we, 
nevertheless,  have  only  in  the  last  few  years  learned 
positively  what  it  is  of  which  this  renowned  document 
treats.  Although  even  children  at  school  spoke  so 
glibly  about  indulgences  as  though  they  had  seen  them 
sprout,  green  and  flower,  the  indulgence  was  never- 
theless in  fact  a  great  unknown  quantity  in  the  search 
for  which  the  scholar  ever  again  with  a  sigh  asked  him- 
self the  question:  From  where  does  it  hail?  This  lack 
of  knowledge  was  in  the  last  analysis  due  to  a  wrong 
method  of  approach.  People  had  become  accustomed 
to  look  at  indulgences  from  below,  from  the  angle  of 
the  purchaser.  They  felt  justified  in  seeing  in  the 
motives  which  manifestly  or  supposedly  governed 
people  in  their  purchase  of  indulgences  the  causes  for 


122  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

the  origin  of  the  whole  enigmatical  institution.  This 
method,  however,  will  never  result  in  a  clear  view  of 
the  matter.  For  that  reason  Adolf  Gottlob  in  1906 
for  a  change  tried  the  opposite  manner  of  approach. 
As  a  matter  of  principle  he  for  once  studied  the  indul- 
gences from  above,  from  the  point  of  view  of  the 
grantor.  He  inquired:  What  moved  the  popes  and 
bishops  to  issue  indulgences?  And  lo  and  behold,  the 
riddle  solved  itself  and  the  confused  picture  became 
clear.  The  family  tree,  origin  and  development  of 
the  great  unknown  suddenly  came  clearly  to  light  and 
the  doubts  about  its  original  significance  were  ended. 
The  indulgence  stood  forth  as  a  genuine  offspring  of 
the  period  of  the  great  struggle  between  Christianity 
and  Mohammedanism  and  at  the  same  time  as  a 
most  characteristic  product  of  the  so-called  Germanic 
Christianity. 

At  this  point  it  will  suffice  to  prove  this  for  the  com- 
plete or  plenary  indulgence  of  the  Papacy  only.  In 
religious  wars  between  Christians  and  Mohammedans 
the  questions  arose  very  early :  How  about  the  salva- 
tion of  the  warriors  who  fall  in  these  battles?  For 
the  faithful  Moslem  Mohammed  had  solved  this  prob- 
lem. The  worshiper  of  Allah  entered  the  holy  war 
with  the  firm  conviction  that  in  case  of  death  the  gates 
of  paradise  would  forthwith  be  opened  to  him.  Not  so 
in  the  case  of  the  Christian  fighter  for  the  faith.  He 
asked  himself :  Will  paradise  open  to  me  also  if  I  have 
not  duly  performed  penance  for  my  sins?  Such  doubts 
might  easily  induce  him  to  rather  remain  at  home. 
Very  early,  therefore,  the  popes  who  especially  had 


BEGINNING  OF  THE  CONFLICT  123 

at  heart  the  struggle  against  Islam  attempted  to  dis- 
pel misgivings  of  this  nature.  With  this  end  in  view 
Pope  Leo  IV,  when  in  853  he  summoned  the  Franks 
to  the  holy  war,  very  confidently  held  out  to  the  sol- 
diers of  faith  a  heavenly  reward  should  they  fall  in 
battle.  Indeed  one  of  his  next  successors.  Pope  John 
VIII,  as  early  as  877  granted  to  such  warriors  absolu- 
tion for  their  transgressions. 

These  promises  of  salvation  were  as  yet  no  indul- 
gence. They  had  reference  not  to  Hving  penitents 
but  to  dead  soldiers  of  the  faith.  However,  they 
prove  that  the  idea  which  became  the  mother  earth  and 
the  nourishing  soil  of  indulgences  existed  as  early  as 
the  ninth  century,  namely,  the  idea  that  participation 
in  a  war  against  the  unbeliever  or  other  enemies  of 
religion  is  an  achievement  of  religious  value,  in  fact, 
that  death  in  a  religious  war  is  a  sort  of  martyrdom. 
Who  suffers  this  fate  is  immediately  laid  to  rest 
among  the  flowers  of  paradise  by  St.  Gabriel  and  St. 
Michael,  as  the  Song  of  Roland  later  has  it. 

Once  this  high  estimate  of  fighting  in  the  cause  of 
religion  had  gained  ground  it  was  but  a  short  step  to 
look  upon  participation  in  such  warfare  as  an  equiv- 
alent for  the  penitential  acts,  the  incomplete  fulfill- 
ment of  which  might  prompt  many  a  warrior  to  keep 
his  charger  in  the  stable.  It  was  an  easy  matter  to 
promise  remission  of  these  penitential  punishments 
in  return  for  military  expeditions  against  the  foes  of 
the  faith,  that  is,  to  use  the  remission  of  penances  as  a 
means  of  recruiting.  Thereby  the  Crusading  Indul- 
gence, that  is,  the  complete  remission  of  the  penitential 


124  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

punishment  as  reward  for  taking  part  in  a  religious 
war  was  complete.  When  this  kind  of  indulgence 
originated  is  not  certain.  Very  probably,  however, 
it  is  a  German  pope,  Leo  IX,  who  first  ventured  to 
use  this  type  of  remission  as  a  means  of  getting  sol- 
diers when  in  1052  he  made  ready  for  a  campaign 
against  the  Normans.  It  is  certain  that  such  indul- 
gences were  granted  by  Alexander  II  in  1063  to  the 
warriors  who  went  to  Spain  to  fight  the  Moors,  also 
by  Gregory  VII  in  1080  to  the  faithful  who  were 
willing  to  fight  for  the  anti-king  Rudolf  of  Swabia 
against  the  Emperor  Henry  the  Fourth.  In  1087 
Victor  II  issued  them  for  participation  in  the  struggle 
against  the  Arabs  in  Africa  and  Urban  II  in  1095  for 
the  crusade  to  Jerusalem.  Since  then  the  Crusading 
Indulgence  is  a  firmly  established  instrument  of  Pa- 
pal world  politics.  If  now  we  remember  the  incon- 
veniences, the  ecclesiastical  and  civil  disadvantages 
involved  in  the  penances  of  the  Church,  we  can  under- 
stand why  the  penitents  eagerly  sought  this  indul- 
gence. 

However,  another  motive  acted  even  more  strongly. 
The  ecclesiastical  penance  was  regarded  as  a  substi- 
tute punishment  for  the  purificatory  penalties  in  pur- 
gatory. Whoever  acquired  indulgence,  therefore, 
gained  not  only  liberation  from  the  acts  of  penance 
but  at  the  same  time  also  from  the  corresponding  pun- 
ishments in  purgatory.  Thus  from  the  very  outset  a 
transcendental  effect  was  ascribed  to  the  institution, 
an  influence  upon  purgatory,  and  this  is  what  made 
it  seem  so  desirable  to  everyone. 


BEGINNING  OF  THE  CONFLICT  125 

Indulgences,  however,  did  not  for  very  long  remain 
a  recruiting  measure.  Already  Pope  Urban  II  ab- 
solved old  and  decrepit  persons  from  the  duty  of  per- 
sonal service  in  war  on  the  condition  that  they  furnish 
and  equip  a  substitute  at  their  own  expense.  There- 
upon Pope  Eugene  III,  as  early  as  1145  or  1146, 
promised  to  persons  who  supported  the  crusading 
order  of  the  Templars  with  a  donation  of  money  the 
remission  of  a  seventh  part  of  their  penance.  Finally, 
Innocent  III  in  1199  formally  recognized  the  giving 
of  alms  as  sufficient  for  the  sharing  in  the  graces  of 
the  Crusading  Indulgences.  Thus,  early  in  the 
twelfth  century  we  find  in  place  of  a  personal  per- 
formance a  material  one,  a  money  payment.  There- 
by a  momentous  change  was  wrought  in  the  whole 
character  of  the  indulgence.  From  a  means  of  re- 
cruiting soldiers  it  grew  into  a  method  of  making 
money,  into  an  expedient  of  taxing  the  faithful  which 
was  ever  more  frequently  and  rigidly  employed  in  the 
interest  of  the  papal  finances. 

Meanwhile,  in  the  course  of  the  thirteenth  century 
the  crusading  ideal  more  and  more  lost  its  power  over 
the  minds  of  the  people.  If,  therefore,  the  popes  de- 
sired to  retain  the  important  source  of  income  pro- 
vided by  indulgences,  they  would  have  to  invent  new 
and  efficient  stimuli  for  the  purchase  of  these  favors. 
It  is  the  merit  of  Pope  Boniface  VIII  to  have  clearly 
recognized  this.  By  creating  the  Jubilee  Indulgence 
in  1300  he  assured  the  institution  a  long  further  de- 
velopment highly  beneficial  to  the  papal  finances. 
Originally  the  Jubilee  demanded  of  the  purchaser  as 


126  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

his  share  of  the  bargain  a  pilgrimage  to  Rome.  But 
very  soon  this  later  form  experienced  identically  the 
development  of  the  earlier  Crusading  Indulgence. 
The  personal  was  supplanted  by  the  material  service, 
the  making  of  a  payment  in  money.  And  just  as  once 
upon  a  time  Innocent  III  had  finally  made  the  Cru- 
sading Indulgence  possible  in  return  for  alms  in 
every  parish,  so  now  Pope  Boniface  IX  saw  to  it  that 
the  Jubilee  could  also  be  purchased  everywhere  by 
offering  it  for  sale  after  1393  through  agents  in  all 
the  territories  of  the  Church.  Thus  the  indulgence 
became  a  movable  ware,  the  sale  of  these  favors  a 
"sacred  business." 

In  order  to  facilitate  this  sacred  business  still  more 
the  purchase  of  the  sacred  commodity  was  now  re- 
ceipted for  by  means  of  ecclesiastical  documents,  the 
so-called  indulgence  letters.  At  the  same  time  the 
priests  to  whom  the  undertaking  was  entrusted  were 
equipped  with  the  most  extensive  confessional  pow- 
ers, so  that  the  believer  was  now  in  the  convenient 
position  of  being  able  most  expeditiously  to  acquire, 
in  the  first  place,  remission  from  the  pains  of  hell  by 
confessing  to  the  indulgence  priest,  and  secondly,  to 
gain  freedom  from  the  penalties  of  purgatory  and  the 
penances  imposed  by  the  Church  by  buying  an  indul- 
gence letter.  As  a  result  of  these  innovations  by 
Boniface  IX  confession  and  purchasing  of  indul- 
gences had  therefore  become  a  connected  act.  For  this 
reason  among  others  the  wise  popes  could  refer  to 
this  new  form  of  granting  indulgence  in  brief,  also 
as  "remission  of  guilt  and  punishment."    For  through 


BEGINNING  OF  THE  CONFLICT  127 

it  the  successor  of  Peter  in  reality  made  it  possible 
for  the  faithful  first  by  confession  to  rid  themselves 
of  guilt,  and  then  by  the  indulgence  at  the  same  time 
to  gain  freedom  from  all  the  temporal  penalties  of 
sin. 

However,  this  did  not  complete  the  development 
of  the  sacred  commodity.  Long  ago  the  question  had 
arisen  whether  the  Pope  were  in  the  position  to  free 
also  the  dead  from  purgatory  in  case  a  surviving  de- 
scendant, relative  or  friend  bought  indulgences  for 
them.  Since  the  canon  lawyers  mostly  answered  this 
question  in  the  negative  it  remained  open  until  the 
middle  of  the  fifteenth  century.  Pope  Calixtus  III 
in  1457  seems  to  have  been  the  first  who  dared  assert 
the  right  and  not  until  Sixtus  IV  were  indulgences 
for  the  dead  completely  established.  This  pope  on 
the  twenty-seventh  of  November,  1477,  issued  a  dog- 
matic declaration  about  the  force  of  indulgences  which 
set  at  rest  all  doubts  about  their  usefulness  for  the 
poor  souls  in  purgatory,  and  which  at  the  same  time 
though  only  indirectly  claimed  for  the  pope  jurisdic- 
tion also  over  purgatory. 

In  the  Middle  Ages,  however,  many  things  were 
actually  practised  which  rigid  theologians  and  canon 
lawyers  did  not  approve  and  would  not  recognize  as 
"Catholic  truth."  This  is  partly  true  also  of  indul- 
gences. They  were  centuries  old  before  the  theo- 
logians found  it  expedient  to  seriously  consider  them. 
But  the  first  one  who  did  take  them  up,  Alexander  of 
Hales,  then  performed  the  task  so  thoroughly  that 
little  was  left  for  later  ages  to  add.    Above  all,  he 


128  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

succeeded  in  discovering  the  transcendental  capital 
on  the  basis  of  which  the  Church  as  its  usufructuary 
could  dispense  indulgences:  the  treasury  of  good 
works,  of  the  merits  of  Christ  and  the  saints.  This 
discovery  was  generally  hailed  with  approval  and  was 
generally  accepted.  As  early  as  1343  it  was  given 
dogmatic  sanction  by  Clement  VI  when  he  expressly 
recognized  it  in  his  supplement  to  the  canon  law.  To- 
gether with  the  doctrine  of  the  treasure  the  same  pope 
approved  the  view  that  indulgence  was  the  remission 
of  all  or  part  of  the  temporal  penalties  for  sin,  though 
he  expressly  refrained  from  including  the  punish- 
ments of  purgatory.  Thus  he  still  left  the  teaching 
on  indulgence  undetermined  in  some  essential  points. 
And  this  condition  also  prevailed  in  the  future,  for  the 
declaration  of  Sixtus  IV  recognizing  indulgences  for 
the  dead  was  not  incorporated  in  the  canon  law.  As 
far  as  the  ecclesiastical  courts  were  concerned  it  did 
not  exist.  As  a  dogma  it  was  received  only  b)^  the 
strict  papalists,  but  these  were  not  very  numerous  at 
the  end  of  the  fifteenth  and  the  beginning  of  the  six- 
teenth centuries.  The  theologians  who  regarded  the 
council  as  the  highest  tribunal  in  matters  of  faith 
were  decidedly  in  the  majority  in  France,  Spain  and 
England,  and  also  in  Germany. 

There  was  therefore  not  a  complete  dogma  about 
indulgences  when,  forty  years  after  Sixtus  IV,  Lu- 
ther submitted  to  the  learned  world  his  declaration 
about  the  force  of  indulgences.  In  particular,  an 
official  doctrine  regarding  the  effect  of  indulgences  on 
purgatory  was  still  lacking.    Consequently,  the  Re- 


BEGINNING  OF  THE  CONFLICT  129 

former  was  not  guilty  of  heresy,  but  at  most  of 
having  made  "an  assertion  which  was  insulting  to 
pious  ears"  when  he  refused  to  accept  the  institution 
as  valid  beyond  the  remission  of  the  ecclesiastical 
penances.  Hence  also  Cardinal  Cajetan  found  it  im- 
possible to  proceed  against  him  for  heresy  on  account 
of  the  Ninety-five  Theses,  though  he  certainly  did  not 
lack  willingness  to  do  so. 

In  spite  of  this  unsettled  status  of  its  legal  aspect 
the  popes  promulgated  one  plenary  indulgence  and 
Jubilee  after  the  other,  not  only  for  the  living  but  also 
for  the  dead.  Indeed  they  saw  no  harm  in  especially 
commending  to  their  indulgence  agents  the  sale  of  the 
latter  variety.  It  was  the  most  lucrative  of  the  two. 
It  is  therefore  not  difficult  to  understand  why  efficient 
agents  like  the  well-known  John  Tetzel  spent  their 
best  energies  on  this  branch  of  the  business.  *'Do 
you  not  hear  your  deceased  parents  wail  and  cry  out: 
Have  mercy  on  us !  We  are  suffering  grievous  pun- 
ishment and  pain  from  which  you  can  save  us  with  a 
trifling  alms."  Thus  did  the  eloquent  and  bold  but 
also  quite  dignified  and  corpulent  monk  preach.  And 
to  strengthen  his  plea  he  added,  either  in  prose  or 
verse,  the  old  saying  which  as  early  as  1482  had  been 
condemned   by   the   theological    faculty    of    Paris: 

''As  soon  as  the  money  does  clink  in  the  chest. 
The  soul  it  will  flit  into  heavenly  rest/' 

If  in  the  period  from  1515-20,  in  spite  of  Luther's 
preaching,  the  papal  indulgence  still  netted  such  a 


130  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

large  profit  in  the  territory  of  the  German  Empire 
doubtless  a  big  portion,  if  not  the  biggest  part,  was 
derived  from  the  sale  of  indulgence  letters  for  the  poor 
souls  in  purgatory. 

This  was  the  indulgence  as  Luther  found  it.  Even 
to-day  there  are  plenty  of  apologists  who  feel  that 
they  can  justify  the  "sacred  business"  by  comparing 
it  to  the  modern  popular  missions  and  evangeliza- 
tions. But  the  comparison  limps.  Peoples'  missions 
are  true  missions,  while  the  traffic  in  indulgences  was 
a  real  ''business/'  The  popular  missionary  aims  at 
the  saving  of  souls,  the  indulgence  seller  was  purely 
and  simply  after  the  money.  Pastoral  motives  never 
played  a  roll  in  the  granting  of  these  documents,  es- 
pecially not  in  the  indulgences  which  were  given  out 
by  the  popes  in  an  almost  unbroken  sequence  since 
the  Jubilee  of  1300.  In  these  the  sole  and  only  object 
was  the  filling  of  the  papal  coffers. 

For  that  reason  among  others  from  the  time  of 
Alexander  VI  a  banking  house,  the  renowned  Fug- 
ger  of  Augsburg,  played  the  most  important  role  in 
negotiating  the  "sacred  business."  This  firm  gradu- 
ally gained  control  over  well-nigh  all  the  business 
of  the  Curia  with  Germany,  Poland  and  the  Scan- 
dinavian states.  It  was  consequently  in  the  interest 
of  this  house  to  stimulate  the  intercourse  between  these 
countries  and  Rome  as  much  as  possible,  thereby 
at  the  same  time  increasing  the  flow  of  moneys  to  the 
Eternal  City.  For  this  very  natural  reason  its  Ro- 
man representatives  were  especially  active  among 
other  things  in  bringing  about  the  issuance  of  new 


BEGINNING  OF  THE  CONFLICT  131 

indulgences,  because  ever  since  1507  by  virtue  of  a 
private  agreement  of  which,  however,  the  purchaser 
never  had  any  knowledge  one-third  of  the  total  in- 
come from  all  indulgences  whether  or  not  they  were 
officially  designated  as  intended  for  the  restoration 
of  churches,  the  building  of  dikes  or  for  pious  pur- 
poses otherwise,  flowed  into  the  papal  treasury.  In- 
deed, in  the  beginning  of  1514  this  firm  formally 
appears  as  an  indulgence  agency.  At  that  time  it  ob- 
tained from  the  Curia  the  right  to  offer  papal  indul- 
gences for  sale  everywhere  in  Germany  to  those  in- 
terested, with  the  secret  proviso  that  fifty  per  cent,  of 
the  net  gain  be  turned  over  to  the  Curia.  The  Fuggers 
were  immediately  successful  in  disposing  of  quite  a 
number  of  such  indulgences  in  Germany.  Outwardly 
they  were  not  alike,  however.  In  one  at  least  the 
Papacy  was  named  as  the  recipient  of  the  proceeds, 
while  privately  one-half  was  promised  to  a  person  to 
whom  the  Curia  felt  under  obligations.  This  one,  the 
Mayence  Indulgence  of  the  thirty-first  of  March,  1515, 
is  the  indulgence  which  called  Luther  into  the  hsts. 

On  the  thirtieth  of  August,  1513,  the  Margrave  Al- 
brecht  of  Brandenburg  had  been  postulated  as  Arch- 
bishop of  Magdeburg  and  shortly  after  as  adminis- 
trator of  the  episcopate  of  Halberstadt.  The  holding 
of  two  bishoprics  by  one  person  was  illegal.  Besides, 
the  twice  chosen  candidate  was  only  twenty-three 
years  old.  He  was  therefore  in  need  of  a  double  papal 
dispensation.  Pope  Leo  X,  however,  made  no  objec- 
tions. On  the  sixteenth  of  December,  1513,  he  con- 
firmed the  young  Hohenzollern  prince  as  adminis- 


132  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

trator  of  Magdeburg  and  Halberstadt.  As  legal  fee 
for  this  confirmation  Albrecht  paid  1079  ducats. 
One  ducat  has  a  value  of  about  $2.25  in  gold,  or  is 
worth  at  present  money  rates  between  $6.25  and 
$7.50.) 

Hardly  had  the  Fuggers  closed  this  deal  when  the 
prospect  of  a  third  bishopric  opened  up  to  the  fortu- 
nate prince.  On  the  ninth  of  March,  1514,  "evidently 
through  divine  inspiration,"  as  the  Berlin  court  forth- 
with claimed,  he  was  also  elected  Archbishop  of  May- 
ence.  Now,  the  Curia  had  occasionally  granted  to 
one  of  its  cardinals  three  or  more  episcopal  sees,  but 
it  was  an  altogether  unprecedented  situation  that  a 
German  prince  who  had  not  even  reached  the  canoni- 
cal age  should  demand  for  himself  three  large  bishop- 
rics. Albrecht  himself  at  first  did  not  press  the  mat- 
ter. With  all  the  more  vigor  therefore  his  brother, 
the  Elector  Joachim,  began  to  work  upon  the  Curia 
through  Dr.  Blankenfeld  from  Berlin.  The  increase 
of  power  which  the  luck  of  Albrecht  promised  for  the 
house  of  Brandenburg  was  so  great  that  even  the 
Elector  was  interested  in  seeing  the  affair  terminate 
favorably.  As  a  result  Brandenburg  would  at  one 
stroke  gain  the  ascendency  in  Northern  Germany 
over  its  old  rival.  Electoral  Saxony.  At  the  same 
time  this  increase  of  territory  would  effectively  block 
further  extension  of  the  latter's  power  in  Thuringia. 

The  Curia  long  fought  the  plans  and  wishes  of  the 
two  Hohenzollerns  tenaciously.  But  finally  it  was 
in  this  case  also  persuaded  to  change  its  mind  by  a 
splendid  bargain.     Upon  advice  from  an  unknown 


BEGINNING  OF  THE  CONFLICT  133 

person  Albrecht  offered  the  Pope  in  addition  to  the 
legal  fees  for  the  confirmation  as  Archbishop  of 
Mayence,  amounting  to  12,300  ducats,  a  composition 
of  10,000  ducats  on  the  condition  that  he  be  con- 
firmed and  recognized  in  all  three  bishoprics.  In  prin- 
ciple the  Pope  immediately  entered  upon  this  sug- 
gestion. But  for  a  long  time  still  the  two  parties 
haggled  about  the  size  of  the  composition.  The  Curia 
first  demanded  15,000  ducats,  thereupon  it  asked  12,- 
000  on  the  plea  that  twelve  was  the  number  of  the 
apostles.  One  of  Albrecht's  agents  retorted  to  this 
that  there  were,  however,  only  seven  deadly  sins.  Fi- 
nally the  parties  agreed  to  the  original  sum. 

In  order,  however,  to  strengthen  the  somewhat  du- 
bious solvency  of  the  young  ecclesiastical  prince  Leo  at 
the  same  time  proffered  to  him  a  Jubilee  Indulgence 
for  the  Archbishopric  of  Mayence  on  condition  that 
he  deliver  fifty  per-cent.  of  the  proceeds  to  the  Curia. 
Albrecht  naturally  made  no  objections  to  this  plan. 
Whereupon  he  was  on  the  eighteenth  of  August,  1514, 
finally  confirmed  as  Archbishop  of  Mayence,  Arch- 
bishop of  Magdeburg  and  Bishop  of  Halberstadt. 
A  few  months  later  on  the  thirty-first  of  March,  1515, 
the  Pope  announced  the  promised  plenary  indulgence 
to  run  for  eight  years  in  the  Archdioceses  of  Mayence 
and  Magdeburg,  as  well  as  in  all  the  Brandenburg  ter- 
ritories. The  income  from  it,  according  to  the  official 
announcement,  was  to  be  used  solely  for  the  building 
of  St.  Peter's,  but  one-half  had  already,  in  accordance 
with  the  contract  of  August,  1514,  been  secretly  writ- 
ten over  to  the  young  Hohenzollern. 


134  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

The  Curia  could  well  afford  to  feel  satisfied  with 
the  deal.  It  gained  directly  about  $120,000  in  cash. 
Besides,  it  had  once  more  assured  itself  of  one-half 
of  the  proceeds  of  an  indulgence  which  promised  to 
be  very  lucrative,  inasmuch  as  the  Pope  had  in  the 
territories  in  question  suspended  in  its  favor  all  other 
indulgences,  with  the  exception  of  some  of  those 
placed  by  the  house  of  Fugger.  Such  a  thing  had 
never  been  done  before.  The  young  HohenzoUern 
was  not  so  fortunate.  He  had  from  the  first  become 
heavily  indebted  to  the  Fuggers.  These  obligations, 
however,  might  be  borne  considering  the  tremendous 
success  which  his  house  had  gained  over  the  house  of 
Wettin. 

This  was  the  indulgence  against  which  Luther  di- 
rected his  Theses  of  the  thirty-first  of  October,  1517. 
He  did  not  even  surmise  then  the  sordid  means  by 
which  the  sacred  business  this  time  particularly  had 
been  concluded.  Had  he  done  so  his  criticism  of  the 
abuse  of  indulgences  would  very  likely  have  been 
much  more  severe.  But  it  must  not  be  forgotten  that 
in  the  Theses  he  merely  criticized.  He  did  not  wish 
to  destroy  the  institution.  He  only  desired  to  make 
it  again  what  in  his  opinion  it  had  originally  been,  a 
mere  remission  of  the  canonical  penance.  His  stric- 
tures, therefore,  still  move  altogether  within  the  limits 
of  the  mediaeval  system.  He  was  not  attacking  a 
"formal  dogma"  of  the  Church.  Furthermore,  and 
this  also  is  of  the  utmost  importance,  Luther  chose  for 
his  criticism  the  most  modest  and  unobtrusive  form. 
Me  merely  invited  academic  discussion  on  the  value 


BEGINNING  OF  THE  CONFLICT  135 

of  indulgences  and  thus  distinctly  addressed  himself 
to  the  narrow  circle  of  specialists.  Nevertheless,  the 
Church  forthwith  adopted  most  decisive  measures  .by 
opening  without  delay  that  renowned  heresy  trial 
which,  after  lasting  for  more  than  three  years,  finally 
ended  with  the  outlawing  of  the  Wittenberg  professor 
by  the  Church  and  the  Empire. 

In  November,  1517,  the  Elector  Albrecht  of  May- 
ence  in  all  haste  denounced  the  stubborn  monk  to  the 
Holy  See  for  seducing  the  common  people  and  pro- 
mulgating new  doctrines.  At  the  same  time  he  turned 
over  to  his  councillors  at  Halle  the  task  of  bringing 
suit  against  the  poisonous  heretic  "through  Master 
John  Tetzel."  In  doing  this  Albrecht  had  merely 
fulfilled  his  duties  as  bishop.  Personally  he  had  no 
interest  in  the  matter.  Hence  the  suit  which  had  been 
left  in  the  hands  of  the  electoral  councillors  came  to 
naught.  On  the  other  hand,  Albrecht's  denunciation 
to  which  had  been  added  as  documentary  evidence  a 
copy  of  the  Ninety-five  Theses,  the  treatise  against 
Scholastic  theology  and  the  Reformer's  writing  on 
the  penitential  Psalms  made  a  deep  impression  at 
Rome,  not  on  the  Pope  but  on  Tetzel's  powerful 
friends  and  fellow  Dominicans  at  the  Curia.  The 
General  of  the  Dominicans,  Cardinal  Cajetan,  seem- 
ingly under  the  impression  of  the  Theses,  on  the  eighth 
of  December  wrote  a  treatise  on  indulgences  in  which 
he  attempted  with  much  learning  to  defend  the  opin- 
ions attacked  by  Luther. 

However,  the  Pope  was  careful  not  to  proceed  too 
vigorously  at  the  outset.    At  first  on  the  fifth  of  Feb- 


136  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

ruary,  1518,  through  the  medium  of  the  head  of  the 
Augustinian  order,  Gabriel  della  Volta,  he  tried  in  a 
conciHatory  manner  to  bring  the  disturbing  monk  to 
his  senses.  Thereupon  Volta  not  only  transmitted 
a  warning  to  Luther,  but  at  the  same  time  he  prevailed 
upon  the  chapter  general  of  the  Augustinians  which 
met  at  the  end  of  April,  1518,  in  Heidelberg  to  take 
up  the  affair.  This  induced  the  presumptuous  brother 
in  May,  1518,  to  make  a  detailed  justification  of  his 
teachings  on  indulgences  before  the  Pope  by  submit- 
ting his  Resolutions  to  the  Ninety-five  Theses.  On 
the  main  point,  however,  Volta  suffered  complete  de- 
feat. Luther  refused  to  recant  and  to  obey  the  behests 
of  the  government  of  the  order,  which  found  itself 
powerless  to  force  him  to  obedience,  inasmuch  as  not 
only  the  Vicar-general  Staupitz  but  also  the  Elector 
of  Saxony  supported  the  monk  in  his  opposition. 

Meanwhile  the  Dominicans  had  not  remained  idle. 
Possibly  as  early  as  the  end  of  January,  at  their  meet- 
ing in  Frankfurt  on  the  Oder  upon  the  occasion  of 
Tetzel's  promotion  to  the  doctorate  in  theology,  they 
seem  to  have  decided  to  denounce  Luther  not  only  for 
spreading  new  doctrines  but  for  heresy.  This  accusa- 
tion also,  however,  was  not  immediately  acted  upon 
by  the  Curia.  It  waited  to  see  whether  Volta  would 
succeed  in  forcing  Luther  to  recant.  Only  after  this 
attempt  seemed  to  be  a  complete  failure  did  the  Fiscal 
Procurator  Perusco  upon  renewed  pressure  by  the 
Dominicans  in  June,  1518,  induce  the  Pope  to  em- 
power him  to  open  the  trial  of  Luther  in  the  usual 
form  under  the  indictment  of  ''suspicion  of  heresy." 


BEGINNING  OF  THE  CONFLICT  137 

At  the  suggestion  of  Perusco  the  Pope  entrusted  the 
conduct  of  the  preliminary  investigation  to  the  highest 
judge  of  the  Curia,  the  Auditor-general,  Jerome  Ghi- 
nucci.  Simultaneously  the  official  expert  of  the  Curia 
on  matters  of  faith,  the  Magister  Sacri  Palatii,  Prie- 
rias  was  commissioned  to  furnish  a  theological  opinion 
en  the  Theses  of  Luther.  On  the  basis  of  this  opinion, 
should  there  be  need  of  it,  the  proceedings  against  the 
Augustinian  were  to  be  further  set  in  motion.  Prierias 
was  a  Dominican,  a  strict  adherent  of  St.  Thomas 
Aquinas  and  a  curialist.  He  therefore  fulfilled  his 
task  with  youthful  fire.  Inside  of  three  days  he  wrote 
an  opinion  in  which  he  dispatched  the  new  heretic  with 
extreme  rudeness  and  tactlessness.  Personally  he  was 
so  proud  of  his  performance  that  he  immediately  pub- 
lished it.  It  made  the  desired  impression  at  least  on 
Ghinucci,  the  judge  delegated  for  the  case.  In  the 
beginning  of  June,  1518,  then,  Prierias  and  Ghinucci 
jointly  issued  the  citation  to  Luther  in  the  customary 
form  asking  him  to  appear  in  Rome  for  the  hearing. 
He  was  ordered  to  justify  himself  at  latest  within 
sixty  days  after  the  receipt  of  the  citation  before 
Perusco,  Ghinucci  and  Prierias  at  Rome  on  the  score 
of  suspected  heresy  and  revolt  against  the  papal  au- 
thority. In  support  of  these  charges  the  papal  chan- 
cery had  enclosed  the  opinion  of  Prierias.  Thus  the 
trial  of  Luther  for  heresy  had  been  opened  in  due 
form. 

The  summons  reached  Wittenberg  on  the  seventh 
of  August.  It  seemed  therefore  that  until  the  begin- 
ning of  October,  Luther  would  have  time  to  decide 


138  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

on  his  attitude  in  the  matter.  But  things  proceeded 
differently  from  what  he  and  his  friends  expected.  Al- 
ready on  the  twenty-third  of  August  the  Pope  or- 
dered Cardinal  Cajetan,  who  at  the  time  was  attend- 
ing the  Diet  at  Augsburg,  to  examine  the  Wittenberg 
monk  without  delay  and  in  case  he  did  not  recant  to 
immediately  arrest  him  and  have  him  brought  to 
Rome.  Should  Luther  escape  apprehension  the  car- 
dinal was  directly  and  without  further  ado  to  excom- 
municate him  and  all  his  adherents  and  patrons.  Only 
two  days  later  the  General  of  the  Augustinians,  Volta, 
commissioned  the  Provincial  of  the  order  in  Saxony, 
Gerhard  Hecker,  to  forthwith  apprehend  and  bind 
the  heretic. 

What  had  happened  meanwhile?  Cajetan  had  in 
the  course  of  the  summer  in  Augsburg  succeeded  in 
taking  advantage  of  the  dissension  between  the  Em- 
peror and  the  Elector  of  Saxony  and  had  induced  the 
former  to  send  a  letter  to  the  Pope  which,  while  very 
unfavorable  to  Luther,  was  very  flattering  for  the 
Pope.  At  the  same  time  he  had  busily  collected  in- 
formation on  Luther's  teachings  and  opinions  and 
made  a  detailed  report  on  them  to  the  Curia.  From 
these  the  powers  at  Rome  derived  the  impression  that 
the  presumptuous  Augustinian,  as  the  Dominicans 
kept  on  insisting,  was  in  reality  a  notorious  heretic, 
and  further  that  it  would  be  possible  with  the  aid  of 
the  imperial  power  to  bag  him  immediately.  There- 
fore Rome  adopted  the  method  prescribed  by  the 
canon  law  for  the  treatment  of  notorious  heretics. 
The  Papacy  had  thus  in  keeping  with  the  wishes  of 


BEGINNING  OF  THE  CONFLICT  139 

the  Dominicans  decided  to  conclude  the  trial  as 
quickly  as  possible. 

But  the  plan,  which  had  been  so  well  prepared  from 
the  juridical  and  political  point  of  view,  failed  be- 
cause of  the  opposition  of  the  Elector  of  Saxony. 
Though  Luther  appeared  before  Cajetan  in  Augs- 
burg he  did  not  do  so  before  his  Elector  had  insured 
him  against  arrest.  At  the  same  time  the  cardinal 
convinced  himself  in  his  conference  with  the  "German 
beast"  that  the  necessary  dogmatic  basis  for  a  con- 
demnation of  the  heretic  was  lacking.  Instead,  there- 
fore, of  directly  proceeding  against  Luther  and  his 
adherents  with  ban  and  interdict  he  for  the  present 
wholly  laid  aside  his  instructions  and  the  bull  of  ex- 
communication which  Miltiz  in  the  interval  had 
brought  from  Rome  all  complete  in  order  that  he 
might  first  clear  away  these  hindrances. 

The  Curia  willingly  entered  upon  his  proposals. 
On  the  ninth  of  November  the  Pope  issued  a  decretal 
on  indulgences  in  which  Luther's  teachings  were  con- 
demned as  heretical,  though  their  author  was  not  men- 
tioned by  name.  At  the  same  time  Karl  von  Miltiz 
was  sent  to  the  court  of  Saxony  to  persuade  the  old 
Elector  by  amicable  means  to  dehver  up  the  heretic. 
The  cheerful  chamberlain  soon  forgot  his  very  pre- 
cisely worded  instructions.  On  his  own  responsibility 
he  exchanged  the  office  of  bailiff  with  which  he  had 
been  charged  for  the  more  congenial  one  of  mediator. 
Why  did  the  Curia  tranquilly  tolerate  this  arbitrary 
act?  Undoubtedly  even  the  Pope  allowed  himself  to 
be  deceived  by  the  clever  talker.  He  also  seriously  be- 


140  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

lieved  that  Luther  was  ready  to  recant.  Therefore, 
he  still,  on  the  twenty-ninth  of  IMarch,  1519,  addressed 
a  very  friendly  letter  to  the  declared  heretic  inviting 
him  to  come  to  Rome.  Indeed,  he  even  promised  him 
to  refund  his  traveling  expenses. 

The  deciding  motive,  however,  was  another.  Em- 
peror Maximilian  had  died  in  January,  1519.  His 
grandson,  the  later  Charles  V,  and  Francis  I  of 
France,  were  candidates  for  the  succession  in  the  Em- 
pire. But  the  prospects  of  Francis,  the  ally  of  the 
Pope,  were  so  slim  that  already  at  the  end  of  January 
Leo  X,  who  wished  to  hinder  the  succession  of  Charles 
at  all  hazards,  began  to  consider  the  candidacy  of  the 
Elector  of  Saxony.  Miltiz's  arbitrary  policy  of  medi- 
ation was  therefore  at  the  moment  very  welcome  to  the 
Curia.  ,  Indeed,  it  is  quite  possible  that  in  order  to 
win  over  the  Elector  the  Pope  held  out  the  promise 
of  elevating  Luther  to  the  cardinalate.  The  conse- 
quence was  that  the  trial  rested  for  fully  fourteen 
months. 

However,  by  the  summer  of  1519  all  the  hopes  of 
the  Papacy  had  been  shattered.  On  the  twenty-eighth 
of  June  Charles  of  Spain  was  elected  Emperor  and 
in  July  at  the  Disputation  at  Leipzig  Luther  f ormallj'- 
declared  war  on  the  Papacy.  After  this  even  Rome 
could  have  no  further  delusions  about  the  planless 
and  vacillating  humbug-policy  of  ^Rliltiz.  It  decided 
to  reopen  the  heresy  trial.  Before  doing  so  one  more 
attempt  was  made  through  IMiltiz  to  intimidate  the 
Elector  of  Saxony  by  summarily  threatening  him  with 
the  interdict  if  he  did  not  drop  Luther.    This  threat^, 


BEGINNING  OF  THE  CONFLICT  141 

however,  did  not  have  the  desired  effect.  The  other- 
wise very  timid  old  gentleman  in  a  very  voluminous 
memoir  very  courteously  but  very  firmly  set  forth 
that  the  Curia  had  no  power  to  excommunicate  his 
professor  or  place  his  lands  under  the  inderdict  as  long 
as  the  attempt  at  mediation  to  be  made  by  the  Arch- 
bishop of  Treves  and  ordered  by  Miltiz  had  not  taken 
place. 

This  document  had  the  effect  of  a  declaration  of  war 
at  Rome.  On  the  ninth  of  January,  1520,  an  Italian 
official  of  the  Curia  replied  to  it  in  the  papal  consis- 
tory with  a  thundering  oration  which  proved  that 
Rome  also  knew  very  well  how  to  use  the  abusive  style 
of  the  day.  In  this  answer  the  old  Elector,  who  was 
so  ready  to  be  pliant  and  yielding  and  who  suffered 
so  much  for  the  sake  of  peace,  was  depicted  in  the 
blackest  colors  as  a  raging,  cruel  tyrant,  as  the  exe- 
cutioner of  the  clergy,  the  Apostolic  See,  indeed,  the 
whole  Christian  religion,  and  finally  even  set  down 
as  the  twin  head  of  the  horrible  hydra,  Luther.  The 
oratorical  masterpiece  culminated  in  the  proposal  to 
immediately  reopen  the  proceedings  against  Luther 
in  due  form. 

The  Pope  acted  upon  the  suggestion  without  delay. 
On  the  first  of  February  he  formed  a  committee  of 
several  mendicant  monks  and  two  cardinals  to  pre- 
pare a  bull  of  excommunication.  The  overhasty  work 
of  this  body  proved  unacceptable  and  its  place  was 
taken  by  a  new  commission,  on  the  eleventh  of  Febru- 
ary, consisting  of  the  cardinals  Cajetan  and  Accolti, 
and  the  most  eminent  theologians  of  Rome.    About 


142  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

the  middle  of  March  this  board  proposed  to  the  Pope 
the  condemnation  of  a  part  only  of  Luther's  Theses  as 
directly  heretical,  while  it  advised  that  the  rest  merely 
be  branded  as  "offensive  to  pious  ears."  Further,  it 
suggested  that  this  decision  be  published  for  the  pres- 
ent in  the  form  of  a  decretal  without  the  mention  of 
Luther's  name,  and  finally  that  the  accused  be  once 
more  in  a  papal  breve  asked  to  recant. 

At  first  the  Pope  entered  upon  this  proposition.  On 
the  fifteenth  of  March  the  general  of  the  Augus- 
tinians,  Volta,  at  his  command  requested  Staupitz  to 
induce  Luther  to  retract.  But  upon  the  instigation 
of  Eck  who  had  come  to  Rome  at  the  Pope's  summons 
the  proposal  of  the  committee  was  after  all  declined 
by  the  head  of  the  Church.  In  April  he  commanded 
the  cardinals  Accolti  and  Cajetan,  Dr.  Eck  and  Dr. 
John  Hispanus  to  forthwith  prepare  a  bull  of  excom- 
munication. Eck  thereupon  on  the  second  of  May 
submitted  to  the  Pope  in  his  hunting  lodge  Magliana 
where  Leo  loved  to  pursue  the  princely  sport  of  boar 
baiting  the  completed  draft.  Wholly  in  keeping  with 
the  genius  of  the  locality  the  document  opened  with 
the  noble  words:  "Rise  up,  O  Lord,  a  wild  boar  has 
invaded  your  vineyard."  In  the  sessions  on  the 
twenty-first,  twenty-third,  twenty-fifth  of  May  and 
on  the  first  of  June  the  bull  was  submitted  to  the  col- 
lege of  cardinals.  On  the  latter  date  they  also  ac- 
cepted it  without  alteration.  The  objection  of  Car- 
dinal Carvajal  against  condemning  the  appeal  to  a 
general  council  as  Luther's  worst  heresy  was  disre- 
garded by  the  body  which  simply  proceeded  with  the 


BEGINNING  OF  THE  CONFLICT  143 

order  of  business  for  the  day.  Thereupon  the  draft 
was  forwarded  to  the  chancery  and  was  finally  issued 
by  it  officially  in  the  customary  form  on  the  fifteenth 
of  June. 

The  bull  is  a  very  voluminous  document.  The  text 
for  it  was  furnished  by  the  jurist  Accolti,  the  theo- 
logical evidence  by  Eck  and  the  Dominicans  of  Lou- 
vain.  It  orders  the  burning  of  all  books  written  by 
Luther  and  anathematizes  forty-one  of  his  Theses. 
Luther  himself,  however,  is  for  the  present  merely 
threatened  with  the  great  ban.  He  was  to  remain  free 
to  retract  within  sixty  days  after  the  publication  of 
the  docimient  in  Rome  and  in  the  dioceses  of  Bran- 
denburg, Meissen  and  Merseburg.  Is  not  this  last 
clause  strange,  a  proof  of  truly  apostolic  patience  and 
clemency?  Not  at  all.  In  accordance  with  the  canon 
law  every  heretic  had  to  be  given  such  an  "evangelic 
warning"  before  he  could  be  personally  condemned. 

There  is  nothing  striking  or  unusual  whatsoever  in 
this  renowned  trial  for  heresy,  not  even  the  peculiar 
intermingling  of  ecclesiastical  and  purely  secular  po- 
litical interests  which  in  its  course  becomes  so  manifest 
in  the  attitude  of  the  Curia.  This  combination  is  a 
common  characteristic  of  the  papal  ecclesiastical  re- 
gime of  those  days.  At  most  the  share  which  the 
Dominicans  bore  in  the  whole  trial  is  noteworthy.  In 
the  first  place,  they  are  responsible  for  the  fact  that  it 
came  about  at  all.  They  furnished  the  theological 
reporter  as  a  result  of  whose  expert  opinion  the  cita- 
tion was  issued  to  Luther  in  June,  1518.  By  untiring 
machinations  they  further  carried  the  point  of  open- 


144  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

ing  the  trial  for  notorious  heresy  on  the  twenty-third 
of  August  of  the  same  year.  They  also  are  to  blame 
for  the  fact  that  the  charges  were  later  taken  up  again 
after  the  interlude  of  the  political  campaign  insti- 
gated by  the  Medici — who  in  matters  of  theology  was 
quite  innocent — in  connection  with  the  scramble  for 
the  imperial  crown.  They  also  predominated  in  the 
commission  which  prepared  the  verdict  and  lastly  fur- 
nished the  greater  part  of  the  incriminatory  evidence 
used  in  the  bull.  It  is  therefore  just  to  say  that  Tet- 
zel's  order  omitted  nothing  to  avenge  him.  Perhaps 
the  most  interesting  fact  in  connection  with  the  action 
of  the  order  is  this  that  next  to  the  General  of  the 
order,  Cajetan,  the  lion's  share  in  the  proceedings 
was  borne  by  a  countryman  of  Tetzel,  the  Meissonian 
nobleman,  Nicholas  von  Schoenberg.  Of  him  it  is  said 
that  once  upon  a  time  he  was  won  over  to  the  order 
by  the  preaching  of  Savonarola.  But  by  this  time  he 
had  long  since  gone  over  into  the  camp  of  this  great 
Dominican's  mortal  enemies,  the  Medici.  As  the  con- 
fidant of  Cardinal  Giuho  Medici  (Clement  VII)  he 
played  the  most  important  role  at  the  Cui'ia  in  these 
fateful  days. 

Since  the  bull  was  not  published  in  Germany  by 
Eck  until  the  end  of  September  the  period  of  grace 
vouchsafed  therein  to  Luther  did  not  expire  until  the 
twenty-eighth  of  November.  What  use  the  Reformer 
made  of  it  is  well  known.  On  the  tenth  of  December 
he  publicly  and  solemnly  renounced  the  Antichrist  by 
consigning  the  bull  to  the  flames  with  the  words:  "Be- 
cause thou  hast  condemned  the  truth  of  God  may  God 


BEGINNING  OF  THE  CONFLICT  145 

condemn  thee  to  this  fire."  Thereupon  the  Antichrist 
at  last  spoke  his  final  word.  On  the  third  of  January 
the  bull  Decet  Romanum  Pontificem  placed  Luther 
under  the  major  ban.  This  second  and  actual  bull 
of  excommunication,  however,  contained  "so  many 
errors  detrimental  to  the  cause  of  the  Church"  that 
Aleander,  the  papal  legate,  from  the  Diet  of  Worms 
sent  it  back  directly  to  Rome  to  be  rewritten.  The 
improved  form  of  the  "sacred  curse"  was  not  returned 
to  Worms  until  the  sixth  of  May.  By  that  time,  how- 
ever, it  was  no  longer  needed  at  the  Diet.  The  "Holy 
Empire"  had  already  arrived  at  a  decision  on  the 
basis  of  the  sentence  of  June,  1520,  and  two  days  be- 
fore the  great  heretic  had  disappeared  without  leaving 
a  trace.  He  abode  in  full  security  "in  the  hills,  the 
region  of  the  birds  and  the  air,"  and  from  his  home  in 
the  clouds  ridiculed  the  plots  of  the  Antichrist  which 
to  him  seemed  merely  "an  imposing  cloud  of  smoke" 
like  unto  the  vapors  he  so  frequently  saw  rising  sky- 
ward in  thick  swaths  from  the  charcoal  kilns  in  the 
green  wilds  about  his  Patmos. 


CHAPTER  V. 

The  First  Practical  Attempts  at  Reform, 

T  S  it  true  that  the  aforementioned  plots  against 
Luther  and  the  imperial  statute  which  permitted 
them,  the  Edict  of  Worms  of  the  twenty-fifth  (28) 
of  May,  1521,  were  really  so  harmless,  in  reality  noth- 
ing more  than  a  large  "imposing  cloud  of  smoke  which 
acts  as  though  it  meant  to  storm  the  sun,  but  is  quickly 
scattered  by  a  light  breeze  so  that  no  one  knows 
whither  it  has  gone"?  If  we  look  only  upon  Luther 
and  the  external  progress  of  the  Evangelical  move- 
ment it  is  indeed  hardly  possible  to  judge  otherwise. 
The  Reformer  himself  suffered  no  harm  from  the 
edict,  and  the  movement  went  forward  unchecked, 
even  though  in  certain  localities,  as,  for  instance,  in 
the  Netherlands,  it  met  with  energetic  opposition. 

According  to  the  traditional  point  of  view,  however, 
it  is  thought  that  after  all  the  edict  had  one  disagree- 
able indeed  ominous  result.  At  the  very  moment 
when  the  time  seemed  ripe  for  the  change  from  words 
to  deeds,  from  mere  criticism  to  the  practical  work 
of  reform,  it  robbed  the  Evangelical  party  of  the  life- 
giving  presence  and  aid  of  its  born  leader.  Thus  it 
came  about  that  radical  spirits  got  the  upper  hand  in 
Wittenberg  who  by  their  fanaticism  severely  com- 
promised the  cause,  and  further  that  at  the  turning 
of  the  year,  1521,  a  dangerous  crisis  developed  in  the 
146 


FIRST  ATTEMPT  AT  REFORM  147 

capital  and  forum  of  the  movement  which  the  young 
party  was  not  able  to  overcome  without  loss  of 
strength  and  prestige. 

Is  this  customary  view  of  the  so-called  Wittenberg 
Unrest  of  1521-22  still  in  agreement  with  the  present 
status  of  our  knowledge?  Heinrich  Barge  emphati- 
cally denies  it.  He  claims  that  not  the  sudden  disap- 
pearance but  the  unexpected  return  of  Luther  to 
Wittenberg  was  fraught  with  danger  for  the  Evan- 
gelical cause.  Luther's  sudden  vanishing  from  the 
scene  rather  benefited  than  harmed  it,  he  says.  Ac- 
cording to  him  it  cleared  the  path  for  a  new  religious 
tendency  which  through  its  moral  power  and  practical 
energy  distinguished  itself  favorably  from  that  cham- 
pioned by  Luther.  This  new  tendency  was  the  lay- 
Christian  Puritanism  of  Karlstadt  who  was  successful 
in  reforming  divine  service,  the  care  of  the  poor  and 
the  morals  police  in  Wittenberg  in  accordance  with 
the  ideas  of  this  group.  Barge  believes,  furthermore, 
that  it  was  not  Karlstadt's  fault  that  the  students 
conmiitted  a  few  innocent  excesses  in  November  and 
December,  1521,  and  that  out  of  this  movement  grew 
the  iconoclasm  of  1522.  This  leader  he  holds,  would, 
in  spite  of  the  transgressions  of  individual  followers, 
undoubtedly  have  maintained  his  supremacy  had  not 
the  Catholic  Duke  George  of  Saxony  succeeded  in 
intimidating  his  cousin,  the  aged  Elector,  by  the  threat 
that  the  Catholic  imperial  administration  would  at 
the  next  opportunity  take  steps  against  the  Witten- 
bergers.  Barge  thinks  that  the  Elector  thereupon  in 
fear  dropped  the  reforms  at  his  capital,  but  at  the 


148  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

same  time  recalled  Luther  from  the  Wartburg  that 
he  might  calm  the  spirit  of  unrest  in  Wittenberg. 
Thus  in  Barge's  opinion  Luther  in  March,  1522,  un- 
wittingly came  to  Wittenberg  as  the  executor  of  the 
Catholic  imperial  administration,  made  an  end  of  the 
promising  efforts  of  the  lay-Christian  Puritanism  and 
formally  reintroduced  the  Catholic  ritual. 

This  interpretation  of  the  facts  is  absolutely  new 
but  for  that  very  reason  was  much  applauded.  Does 
it  do  justice  to  the  attitude  and  motives  of  Luther, 
and  does  it  rest  on  a  correct  judgment  of  Luther's 
and  Karlstadt's  importance  and  endowments?  Be- 
fore answering  this  question  it  is  necessary  first  to 
fix  the  principles  which  then  and  later  determined  the 
practical  conduct  of  the  Reformer.  They  are  very 
simple  and  in  part  generally  known.  The  first  one 
was :  No  forcible  subversion  of  the  existing  ecclesias- 
tical order  of  things  with  the  help  of  the  rude  fists  of 
"Mr.  Everyman,"  that  is  the  mob,  in  revolutionary  ex- 
citement. Such  an  overturning  of  things  by  force  is 
in  the  first  place  unnecessary,  for  the  gospel  will  clear 
a  path  for  itself.  Every  honest  person  who  hears  it 
must  and  will  sooner  or  later  side  with  it,  even  though 
the  Papists  try  every  means  to  hinder  its  progress. 
This  opinion  the  Reformer  himself  later  on  charac- 
terized as  a  pious  dream.  Secondly,  however,  he  be- 
lieved that  rebellion  was  never  justified,  no  matter 
how  just  the  cause  might  be.  It  is  always  a  work  of 
the  devil,  it  always  merely  aggravates  the  evil  which 
it  means  to  curb. 

In  the  third  place,  Luther  held  that  persons  who 


FIRST  ATTEMPT  AT  REFORM  149 

take  recourse  to  revolution  assume  an  office  which  does 
not  rightfully  belong  to  them  but  alone  to  the  Chris- 
tian nobihty  (governing  class)  or  the  Christian  gov- 
ernments. As  Christians  the  nobles  are  in  duty  bound 
to  care  for  the  common  good,  but  as  lords  they  also 
have  the  sole  right  to  forciby  put  an  end  to  existing 
abuses  if  there  be  no  other  remedy.  These  evils,  he 
claims,  are  all  of  them  in  some  way  connected  with  the 
ordering  of  material  existence  and  as  such  are  subject 
to  the  coercive  power  of  the  government.  This  power, 
however,  as  Okkam  already  taught,  has  but  one  limi- 
tation: the  natural  law,  or  the  law  of  reason,  that  is, 
it  is  neither  bound  by  ecclesiastical  law,  for  that  is 
purely  fictitious,  nor  by  the  written  secular  law:  the 
imperial  law  or  law  of  the  land.  For  all  written  law 
has  sprung  from  the  natural  law  or  from  reason,  its 
heart  and  fountain,  consequently  it  must  also  be  re- 
formed from  out  of  reason,  that  is,  in  accordance  with 
natural  law; indeed,  if  necessary, it  must  be  supplanted 
by  the  law  of  reason.  Is  it  then  not  possible  for  people 
who  have  no  governmental  authority  to  do  anything 
at  all  for  the  gospel?  They  can  do  very  much,  in  fact, 
they  can  do  that  which  is  most  important,  they  can 
speak,  preach  and  write  and  thus  practice  the  gospel 
and  assist  in  carrying  it  on  so  that  the  Papists  will 
find  their  sphere  of  influence  growing  ever  smaller  and 
more  restricted.  Further  they  can  by  exhortation  and 
counsel  induce  the  government  to  interfere.  In  short, 
they  can  by  word  and  writing  in  zealous  propaganda 
serve  the  cause  of  the  gospel  in  exactly  the  same  man- 
ner as  the  Reformer  himself. 


150  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

However,  if  the  government  neglects  to  perform 
its  functions,  what  is  then  to  become  of  the  many 
evangehcal-minded  who,  for  instance,  look  upon  the 
mass  as  blasphemy  or  who  like  the  Evangelical  parish 
priests,  for  example,  are  forced  by  virtue  of  their 
office  to  keep  on  celebrating  the  mass  ?  The  Reformer 
answered  this  question  as  early  as  1520  tersely  and 
without  equivocation.  They  must  quietly  continue 
to  attend  and  celebrate  mass  until  also  the  simple  folk 
have  been  so  far  instructed  that  it  becomes  everywhere 
possible  to  institute  a  celebration  of  the  eucharist  in 
the  German  language  and  in  accordance  with  the  sac- 
ramental words  of  Christ.  They  can  in  his  opinion 
afford  to  wait  until  then  because  they  may  for  the 
present  spiritually  re-interpret  the  prayers  of  offering 
and  the  ceremonies  of  the  mass  and  thus  do  away  with 
all  those  features  in  the  practice  which  are  offensive 
to  their  personal  feelings.  Besides,  it  is  their  duty  to 
be  patient,  for  everyone  who  through  faith  in  the  gos- 
pel has  been  freed  from  the  false  belief  that  salvation 
depends  on  any  kind  of  ceremony,  must,  shall  and  can 
tolerate  these  practices  for  love  of  those  among  his 
brethren  who  for  the  present  are  not  able  to  do  without 
them,  as  long  as  he  always  frankly  and  openly,  in 
speech  and  writing,  insists  that  only  for  love  of  his 
weak  brethren  he  still  obeys  these  tyrannical  ordi- 
nances. 

This  patient  waiting  is  directly  a  duty  for  the  priest 
whose  office  it  is  to  perform  the  public  ceremonies  of 
worship.  No  matter  how  difficult  it  may  be  for  him 
to  say  the  sacrificial  prayers  and  to  perform  the  cere- 


FIRST  ATTEMPT  AT  REFORM  151 

monies,  he  is  not  privileged  on  his  own  responsibility 
to  change  one  word  in  the  liturgy  or  omit  a  single  one 
of  the  prescribed  cultual  acts.  In  fact,  this  intolerable 
constraint  with  which,  as  one  who  is  spiritually  free, 
he  can  after  all  always  come  to  terms,  is  for  him  to  be  a 
spur  to  preach  the  gospel  as  energetically  as  possible. 
Thereby  he  can  enlighten  and  educate  up  to  Evan- 
gelical freedom  the  weak  and  simple  members  of  his 
flock  who  still  with  fettered  spirit  cling  to  the  old 
system.  However,  is  it  also  the  duty  of  a  priest  to 
take  such  consideration  in  case  he  celebrates  the  mass 
only  for  himself  or  for  like-minded  people?  By  no 
means.  On  the  contrary,  it  is  praiseworthy  if  an 
Evangelical  priest  refuses  further  to  read  private 
masses,  or  if  a  convent  of  monks  by  common  action 
abohshes  the  ceremony  of  the  mass  in  its  own  church. 
For  in  this  case  an  injury  of  the  weak  and  simple  is 
not  to  be  feared  directly. 

These  are  the  principles  which  determined  Luther's 
practical  conduct  as  early  as  1520-21.  Obviously  they 
are  wholly  in  keeping  with  the  status  of  the  Evangeli- 
cal movement  of  the  time  and  also  do  not  expect  any- 
thing impossible  from  those  having  Evangelical  con- 
victions. But  it  is  possible  for  a  man  to  have  very 
clear  principles  and  yet  be  wholly  unable  to  create 
new  forms  and  organizations  through  which  they  may 
become  of  practical  value.  It  is  customary  to  affirm 
that  the  Reformer  absolutely  lacked  this  latter  gift. 
Is  such  a  position  justified?  Not  at  all!  While  Lu- 
ther cannot  be  ranked  with  the  great  organizers  of 
the  type  of  Paul,  Calvin  or  Laski,  he  yet  possessed 


152  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

sufficient  knowledge  of  men  and  the  world  to  solve 
the  problems  of  organization  which  confronted  him. 

It  will  suffice  to  point  to  two  renowned  documents 
which  play  an  important  role  in  the  work  of  Barge, 
because  that  author  believes  he  can  ascribe  them  to  his 
hero  Karlstadt.  The  one  is  the  so-called  Treasury- 
Ordinance  (Beutelordnung)  for  Wittenberg  of  No- 
vember, 1521,  which  regulates  the  care  of  the  poor  in 
accordance  with  altogether  new  principles.  In  all 
likelihood  it  was  drawn  up  by  Luther  himself, 
certainly  its  passage  was  due  to  his  urging  and  co- 
operation. The  other  document  is  the  well-known 
charter  of  the  city  of  Wittenberg  dated  January  24, 
1522.  It  is  an  established  fact  that  Karlstadt  had  a 
share  in  its  shaping.  But  that  portion  of  it  which 
owed  its  origin  to  him,  the  regulations  about  church 
service  and  about  the  destruction  of  pictures  and  al- 
tars had  no  permanence.  Everything  else  contained 
in  the  document,  the  articles  on  the  care  of  the  poor, 
against  beggary,  prostitution  and  brothels,  is  merely 
a  repetition  or  further  elaboration  of  older  ideas  of 
Luther. 

Nevertheless,  though  Karlstadt  is  not  the  author  of 
the  two  renowned  ordinances,  he  may  yet,  as  Barge 
claims,  be  the  originator  of  a  new  type  of  piety  which 
distinguishes  itself  favorably  from  the  Lutheran  type. 
The  fact  is  that  he  did  "enrich"  Lutheranism  by  a  few 
new  ideas  of  his  own.  But  how  curious  are  these 
ideas?  No  priest  may  be  given  a  charge  unless  he  i§ 
married  and  is  the  father  of  one  or  two  children ;  who- 
ever in  communion  partakes  only  of  the  host  and  not 
also  of  the  cup  commits  sin;  the  recipient  in  the  eu- 


FIRST  ATTEMPT  AT  REFORM  153 

charist  must  take  the  host  and  chahce  with  his  own 
hands,  for  Christ  says:  Take,  eat!  To  have  pictures 
in  the  churches  is  contrary  to  the  first  commandment ; 
it  is  even  more  harmful  to  place  them  on  altars,  and 
to  paint  likenesses  is  worse  than  adultery  and  theft. 
Fasting  and  confession  is  not  commanded  in  Scrip- 
tures and  must  therefore  be  abohshed.  The  govern- 
ment is  in  duty  bound  to  prohibit  priests  under  heavy 
penalty  from  preaching  anything  but  what  is  con- 
tained in  and  taught  by  Holy  Writ.  Should  the  gov- 
ernment prove  neglectful  in  this  matter  and  not  clear 
the  houses  of  God  of  pictures  and  altars  the  congrega- 
tion "is  empowered  to  assume  control  of  affairs  itself" 
and  to  forcibly  inaugurate  those  reforms  which  it 
deems  necessary. 

These  sentences  certainly  breathe  a  spirit  quite  at 
variance  with  that  of  Luther's  book  on  "the  Freedom 
of  a  Christian."  The  old  system  of  law  has  again 
come  to  honor  therein,  "the  lowest  has  been  placed  up- 
permost, the  least  important  substituted  for  the  best, 
the  last  has  been  given  the  place  of  the  first"  and  all 
manner  of  external  practices  have  been  "so  dressed 
and  puffed  up  as  though  the  salvation  of  the  world 
depended  more  on  them  than  on  Christ."  The  fanati- 
cal strain  always  associated  with  legalistic  piety  is 
also  not  absent.  That  such  fanatical  legalism  is  not 
Evangelical  is  hardly  a  matter  of  contention  among 
Evangelical  Christians,  and  it  is  not  likely  that  Barge 
himself  would  support  that  view.  In  the  heat  of  the 
controversy  he  merely  overlooked  the  harsh,  narrow 
and  stupid  features  in  the  attitude  of  his  hero. 


154  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

All  this,  however,  still  does  not  prove  that  Karl- 
stadt  during  the  Wittenberg  Unrest  was  guilty  also 
of  fanatical  acts,  that  we  have  to  deal  in  this  turbulent 
period  with  really  revolutionary  deeds  and  not  only, 
as  Barge  thinks,  with  quite  harmless  excesses  in  which 
outside  students  played  the  chief  part.  Let  us  there- 
fore for  once  present  the  course  of  this  "commotion" 
wholly  on  the  basis  of  the  genuine  documents  and  then 
in  conclusion  ask  ourselves  whether  Luther  and  the 
electoral  government  of  Saxony  did  Karlstadt  and  his 
associates  an  injustice. 

A  person  arriving  at  Wittenberg  m  the  simimer  of 
1521  might  at  the  first  moment  well  believe  that  the 
Reformer  was  still  present  in  person  and  performing 
the  work  of  his  office  at  the  customary  place.  So 
strongly  did  his  influence  manifest  itself  in  the  whole 
life  of  the  town  even  in  external  affairs.  The  shop- 
keepers and  brewers  who  belonged  to  the  esteemed 
sodalities  of  the  "Sharp-shooters  of  St.  Sebastian  and 
St.  Anne"  were  just  then  abolishing  the  fraternal 
drinking  bouts  which  Luther  had  so  severely  censured. 
Instigated  and  aided  by  him  the  city  council  made 
efforts  to  create  an  entirely  new  system  of  poor  re- 
Hef,  while  the  professors,  students,  canons  and  monks 
busily  kept  on  debating  and  considering  the  problems 
which  he  had  formulated  for  them.  Three  of  these 
were  at  the  time  being  discussed  with  especial  liveli- 
ness :  Should  priests  marry  in  spite  of  the  vow  of  celi- 
bacy ?  May  the  monks  also  throw  aside  their  monastic 
oath  ?  "What  is  to  become  of  the  mass  ?  The  first  ques- 
tion the  Reformer  himself  had  roundly  answered  in 


FIRST  ATTEMPT  AT  REFORM  155 

the  affirmative.  Consequently,  there  was  not  much 
further  dispute  about  it.  It  was  merely  a  question 
now  of  drawing  the  practical  conclusions  from  that 
which  he  held  to  be  good  and  right.  The  first  person 
who  mustered  the  necessary  courage  to  do  this  was 
significantly  a  personal  pupil  of  Luther  and  a  re- 
spected member  of  the  university,  the  provost  Bar- 
tholomew Bernhardi  of  Kemberg.  On  the  thirtieth  of 
May  he  married  his  housekeeper.  This  act  practically 
settles  the  question.  The  other  two  points  were  not  as 
quickly  and  clearly  decided,  for  with  regard  to  these 
no  distinct  declaration  of  the  Reformer  was  as  yet 
available.  Only  when  he  had  stated  his  views  on  the 
mass  in  a  letter  of  the  first  of  August,  and  made  clear 
his  standpoint  on  the  monastic  vows  in  the  themes 
of  the  ninth  of  September,  did  the  discussion  about 
these  become  intense  and  the  wish  grow  active  to  pro- 
ceed in  these  matters  also  from  mere  cogitation  to 
resolute  action. 

But  did  his  adherents  herein  always  strictly  follow 
the  principles  and  direction  of  the  distant  master? 
On  the  twenty-ninth  of  September  Melanchthon  with 
a  few  of  his  pupils  for  the  first  time  privately  cele- 
brated communion  in  both  kinds  at  the  parish  church. 
This  was  wholly  in  accordance  with  Luther's  opinions. 
Thereupon,  in  the  afternoon  of  the  sixth  of  October, 
the  Augustinian  Gabriel  Zwilling  in  the  chapel  of  the 
order  preached  a  great  sermon  against  the  mass  in 
which  he  declared  that  he  would  henceforth  not  cele- 
brate any.  On  the  same  day  his  brothers  in  the  mon- 
astery decided  to  cease  holding  private  masses  in  their 


156  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

chapel  and  henceforth  not  to  raise  or  exhibit  the  host 
for  adoration.  This  also  was  wholly  in  keeping  with 
Luther's  wishes.  However,  Zwilling  immediately 
went  one  step  further.  He  asserted  that  whoever  in 
the  future  hears  mass  commits  idolatry  and  that  it  is 
a  sin  to  take  only  the  bread  in  holy  communion.  Had 
Luther  ever  said  this?  No.  This  stand  was  alto- 
gether contrary  to  his  principles  and  opinions. 

In  the  very  same  month  Zwilling  in  his  sermons  also 
took  up  the  matter  of  the  monastic  vows.  Herein 
again  he  was  not  content  to  state  with  Luther  that 
the  vows  were  contrary  to  the  gospel  and  that  the 
monks  were  therefore  at  liberty  to  cast  aside  the  cowl. 
He  went  so  far  as  to  say:  the  monks  must  give  up 
their  status  and  if  they  are  unwilling  to  do  so,  why, 
use  force,  insult  them  in  public,  starve  them  and  de- 
stroy their  cloisters  until  they  give  in.  Clearly,  Zwill- 
ing is  beginning  to  sound  a  fanatical  note.  The  result 
was  quickly  apparent.  After  the  fourth  of  November 
successively  fifteen  Augustinians  left  the  monastery. 
This  in  itself  could  only  please  Luther  for  he  saw  in 
it  only  a  voluntary  step  of  his  old  brethren.  He  was 
not  aware  that  Zwilling  was  demanding  the  forcible 
unfrocking  of  all  those  living  under  the  vow.  This 
attitude  he  would  have  fought  most  energetically  had 
he  been  advised  of  it.  For  Luther  was  absolutely 
averse  to  the  use  of  force  in  such  matters. 

How  was  the  bold  proceeding  of  the  Augustinians 
received  by  the  authoritative  circles  at  Wittenberg, 
in  the  university  and  in  the  cathedral  chapter?  At 
first  they  were  not  at  all  in  full  agreement  with  it.    A 


FIRST  ATTEMPT  AT  REFORM  157 

committee  of  six  members  of  the  faculties  which  the 
professors  and  the  chapter  appointed  right  after 
Zwilling's  first  sermon  (October  8)  on  the  twelfth  of 
October  requested  the  Augustinians  "to  cease  their 
innovations  for  the  present."  But  on  the  twentieth 
of  that  month  they  approached  the  Elector  with  the 
petition  that  as  a  Christian  prince  he  abolish  the  abuse 
of  the  mass  within  his  territories  as  soon  and  as  speed- 
ily as  possible  so  that  disorder  and  unrest  in  any  form 
might  be  avoided.  This  was  a  rather  naive  demand, 
naive  especially  when  addressed  to  so  careful  a  man  as 
Frederick  the  Wise.  Frederick  therefore  answered 
them  very  quickly  (October  25)  with  the  command 
not  to  be  too  hasty  in  anything  and  not  to  do  aught 
which  might  cause  dissension,  turbulence  and  com- 
plaint. Further,  he  requested  the  chapter  and  the 
university  to  first  officially  state  their  view  in  the  mat- 
ter. 

However,  the  movement  was  now  in  progress  and 
could  not  any  more  be  made  to  turn  back  by  a  simple 
order.  On  the  first  of  November  a  second  communion 
in  both  kinds  took  place  in  the  parish  church  and  on 
this  occasion  not  only  members  of  the  university  but 
citizens  also  participated.  This  shows  that  the  new 
ideas  had  by  this  time  penetrated  also  the  burgher 
class.  In  these  same  days  the  city  council  proposed 
to  the  cathedral  chapter  that  Melanchthon  be  made 
pastor  of  the  city,  and  that  the  twenty-one  sodalities 
connected  with  the  parish  church  be  disbanded.  The 
chapter  refused  both  propositions  and  recognized  only 
the  new  poor  law  which,  as  has  been  stated,  placed  the 


158  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

care  of  the  paupers  in  the  hands  of  the  council.  Nev- 
ertheless, these  events  show  that  this  latter  body  was 
now  also  beginning  energetically  to  take  a  hand  in  the 
Evangelic  cause.  In  the  course  of  November  quite 
a  number  of  other  ecclesiastics  discontinued  their  pri- 
vate masses.  In  short,  the  old  cultual  forms  were  be- 
ginning to  dissolve  themselves. 

There  was  among  the  students  and  burghers,  how- 
ever, no  dearth  of  people  for  whom  this  gradual  de- 
velopment was  too  slow  altogether.  As  a  result  a 
number  of  bad  riots  occurred  in  the  otherwise  quiet 
town  on  the  third  and  fourth  of  December.  On  the 
morning  of  the  third  of  this  month  the  altar  clergy 
of  the  parish  Church  were  driven  from  their  post  with 
stones,  as  they  were  about  to  chant  the  offices  of  Mary, 
so  that  Ahe  first  mass  had  to  be  omitted.  The  scene 
was  repeated  when  the  first  regular  mass  of  the  day 
was  to  be  celebrated.  A  few  students  and  citizens 
simply  took  the  missal  away  from  the  priest  and  drove 
him  from  the  altar.  The  bailiffs  of  the  council  and 
the  beadles  of  the  university  immediately  interfered 
and  arrested  all  the  black  sheep  whom  they  could  ap- 
prehend. However,  the  students  were  not  so  readily 
brought  to  their  senses  again.  On  the  following  day 
they  affixed  a  revolutionary  placard  to  the  door  of  the 
Franciscan  Church.  Fourteen  of  them  appeared  be- 
fore the  monastery  and  there  intimidated  the  poor 
monks  so  that  they  dared  to  read  only  one  mass  in  the 
choir  and  lived  in  fear  of  seeing  their  monastery 
stormed  during  the  night.  However,  the  council  was 
on  its  guard.  They  stationed  watches  and  thus  in- 
duced the  wild  fellows  to  abandon  their  project. 


FIRST  ATTEMPT  AT  REFORM  159 

On  the  same  day  a  handsomely  dressed  horseman 
with  a  dark  beard  stopped  off  at  the  house  of  Pro- 
fessor Amsdorf.  None  of  the  inmates  at  first  rec- 
ognized him.  It  was  Luther.  Five  whole  days  he 
secretly  remained  in  town  and  on  the  ninth  of  Decem- 
ber he  again  disappeared  as  mysteriously  as  he  had 
come.  The  treatise  which  he  wrote  immediately  after 
his  arrival  at  the  Wartburg  shows  with  what  kind  of 
impressions  and  misgivings  he  rode  away.  It  bore  the 
title:  A  True  Warning  to  All  Christians  to  Guard 
Against  Sedition  and  Revolt.  Already  in  the  middle 
of  December  he  sent  the  manuscript  to  Spalatin  with 
the  request  that  it  be  published  as  quickly  as  possible. 
However,  Spalatin  did  not  possess  the  courage  to 
place  upon  the  market  a  book  written  by  the  outlaw. 
Thus  the  splendid  treatise  literally  appeared  post 
festum,  not  until  March,  1522,  after  the  spirit  it  was 
designed  to  check  had  already  perpetrated  its  mis- 
chievous deeds. 

Ever  since  the  riot  on  the  third  of  December  the 
burghers  of  Wittenberg  were  in  a  state  of  latent  fer- 
ment. All  who  were  closely  allied  with  those  who  had 
been  arrested  and  who  shared  their  hostility  toward 
the  idolatry  of  the  mass  were  highly  dissatisfied  with 
the  attitude  of  the  council.  Finally,  the  malcontents 
formally  organized,  drew  up  a  series  of  articles  and  on 
about  the  ninth  of  December  suddenly  stormed  the 
sessions  of  the  council.  There  they  defiantly  de- 
manded the  immediate  release  of  their  imprisoned 
associates  and  the  acceptance  of  their  articles.  These 
are  quite  creditable  to  the  good-will  of  their  authors. 
They  demand  free  preaching  of  God's  Word,  aboli- 


160    LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

tion  of  all  compulsory  masses,  the  cessation  of  all 
votive  and  nuptial  masses,  all  masses  for  the  soul  and 
all  other  cultual  ceremonies  for  the  benefit  of  the 
dead.  Further,  they  requested  the  admission  of  all 
citizens  to  the  Evangelical  communions,  the  closing 
of  all  taverns  in  which  excessive  drinking  was  in 
vogue,  abolition  of  the  brothels  and  strict  punishment 
of  all  forms  of  adultery. 

To  the  people  who  year  after  year  had  heard  the 
preaching  of  Luther  this  all  was  not  new.  However, 
the  manner  in  which  the  framers  of  these  articles  pre- 
sented their  demands  could  not  but  rouse  certain  mis- 
givings. The  council  in  the  first  moment  was  so  help- 
less that  it  actually  liberated  the  prisoners,  but 
thereafter  it  wisely  turned  to  the  Elector  for  help. 
He  imm£diately  dispatched  two  of  his  officials,  and 
these  on  the  seventeenth  of  the  month  in  a  large  con- 
gregational meeting  at  the  castle,  thoroughly  laid 
down  the  law  to  the  Wittenbergers  in  the  matter  at 
hand.  They  forbade  any  further  insult  to  the  priest- 
hood under  dire  penalty  and  disfavor,  had  the  rioters 
of  the  third  of  December  as  far  as  they  could  lay  hold 
of  them  arrested  again,  directed  the  punishment  of  the 
ringleaders  among  the  framers  of  the  articles  and  com- 
manded the  congregation  to  desist  from  any  further 
innovation  until  the  Elector  himself  should  propose 
new  regulations  to  them.  This,  however,  did  not  re- 
establish peace  in  the  city.  The  malcontents  now 
grumbled  more  than  ever,  indeed,  they  sent  letters  of 
complaint  directly  to  the  Elector.  Worst  of  all,  now, 
one  of  the  best-known  teachers  at  the  university  placed 
himself  at  the  head  of  the  citizen  movement. 


FIRST  ATTEMPT  AT  REFORM  161 

The  professors  (of  the  university)  had  in  these  very 
days,  from  the  tenth  to  the  twelfth  of  December, 
finally  answered  the  questions  regarding  the  mass 
which  had  been  submitted  to  them  by  the  Elector.  As 
was  to  be  expected  they  had  been  utterly  unable  to 
"come  to  an  agreement  of  doctrine."  Eight,  among 
them  Melanchthon  and  Karlstadt,  recommended  that 
all  soul  and  votive  masses  be  abolished  and  that  the 
mass  be  reformed  after  the  manner  and  form  of  the 
apostles.  Seven  decided  that  all  was  to  remain  as  of 
old,  and  one  even  handed  in  a  separate  opinion.  It  is 
therefore  easy  to  conceive  why  on  the  nineteenth  of 
December  the  aged  Elector  fromLochau  sent  the  reso- 
lution :  If  you  few  Doctors  have  not  been  able  to  agree 
in  this  affair,  how  much  less  will  that  be  the  case  if  the 
thing  be  brought  before  the  mass  of  the  people. 
Therefore  the  old  system  must  remain  in  force  until 
others  also  take  up  the  matter.  This  was  very  clearly 
spoken. 

But  the  professors  did  not  accede  to  this  very  posi- 
tive order.  Despite  all,  Karlstadt  on  the  twenty- 
second  publicly  announced  in  the  castle  church  that 
on  the  first  of  January  he  would  celebrate  an  Evan- 
gelical communion  service  minus  all  the  customary 
"froth."  When  news  of  this  reached  Lochau  the  old 
Elector  forthwith  (December  23-24)  repeated  the  de- 
liberate command  once  more  to  the  recalcitrant  pro- 
fessor personally  instructing  him  not  to  make  any 
changes  in  the  mass.  Karlstadt  had  undoubtedly  ex- 
pected this.  In  order  to  forestall  his  ruler  he  there- 
fore held  his  Evangelical  eucharist  a  week  earlier. 


162  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

His  example  was  on  the  same  day  followed  by  the  al- 
tarist  Ambrose  Wilken  in  the  neighboring  village 
Dobien,  on  the  first  of  January,  by  Nicasius  Claij  in 
Schmiedeberg,  by  Franz  Guenther  in  Lochau,  Zwill- 
ing  in  Eilenburg  and  somewhat  later  by  the  parish 
priests  at  Jessen  and  Herzberg.  This  shows  suffi- 
ciently that  Karlstadt's  step  was  not  improvised,  but 
was  a  well-prepared  and  pre-arranged  move  by  him- 
self and  his  closest  confederates. 

The  time  for  this  action  had,  however,  been  most 
inauspiciously  chosen.  In  the  period  from  Christmas 
to  the  New  Year  the  ancient  ecclesiastical  fools'  feasts 
were  celebrated  during  which  all  manner  of  mum- 
mery and  nonsense  was  practised  and  tolerated  in  the 
churches.  We  must  therefore  not  judge  too  tragi- 
cally the  excesses  which  occurred  in  Wittenberg  on 
Christmas  eve.  But  it  certainly  was  rather  question- 
able that  the  same  wild  fellows  who  had  raged  and 
caroused  through  the  night,  thereupon,  their  heads 
heavy  with  beer,  attend  the  communion  service  of 
Karlstadt,  and  that  otherwise  also  in  the  course  of 
the  reform  the  crude  instincts  of  Mr.  Everyman  oc- 
casionally revealed  themselves  in  a  very  ugly  manner. 
At  Eilenburg,  for  instance,  Zwilling's  adherents  be- 
came so  enthusiastic  as  a  result  of  the  ceremony  that 
they  immediately  afterward  plundered  the  parsonage 
and  got  into  a  terrible  brawl  with  the  adherents  of  the 
old  faith. 

Even  worse  things,  however,  were  in  store.  On  the 
twenty-seventh  of  December  three  strangers  arrived 
in  the  city  who  were  much  talked  of  in  the  future :  the 


FIRST  ATTEMPT  AT  REFORM  163 

famous  Zwickau  prophets.  They  had  come  to  Wit- 
tenberg with  an  eye  especially  to  the  professors  for 
whom  they  made  considerable  trouble.  They  did  not 
much  concern  themselves  about  the  people.  Their 
chief,  Nickel  Storch,  soon  left  again. 

Much  deeper  was  the  impression  made  upon  the 
citizens  by  the  events  which  soon  after  transpired  in 
the  Black  Cloister.  There  the  chapter  of  the  German 
Augustinian  Congregation  had  been  in  session  since 
the  sixth  of  January.  In  the  meeting  the  Evangelical 
faction  was  in  the  majority.  Therefore  the  assembly 
actually  decided  to  disestablish  the  Congregation. 
Whoever  wished  to  sever  connection  with  it  was  to  do 
so,  while  those  who  for  the  present  had  no  such  desire 
were  quietly  to  remain  in  their  monastery.  No  com- 
pulsion was  desired  and  earnest  endeavors  were  made 
to  proceed  with  moderation.  But  the  assembly  did 
not  lack  men  who  failed  to  comprehend  such  a  course 
of  action.  Zwilling,  for  example,  who  had  hastened 
to  the  meeting  from  Eilenburg,  though  he  had  long 
ago  ceased  to  wear  the  cowl,  now  announced:  It  is 
wrong  henceforth  to  go  to  confession,  to  fast  or  to  do 
any  so-called  good  work.  He  asserted  that  every  fes- 
tival, with  the  exception  of  Sunday,  must  be  dropped, 
that  likewise  the  pictures  and  altars  in  the  churches 
must  be  done  away  with.  Only  what  is  commanded 
by  the  law  of  God  must  be  allowed  to  remain. 

These  utterances  made  such  an  impression  on  the 
Wittenberg  brethren  that  after  the  close  of  the  meet- 
ing of  the  chapter  they  determined  upon  a  new  step 
which  created  an  immense  stir.    On  the  eleventh  of 


164  LUTHEE  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

January  they  burned  every  picture  and  statue  in  their 
chapel  and  on  the  next  day  they  leveled  the  altars  with 
the  floor.  Thus  Zwilling  had  again  raised  a  new  ques- 
tion which  was  forthwith  discussed  most  assiduously : 
Are  pictures  and  altars  henceforth  to  be  tolerated? 
Melanchthon  and  other  respected  professors  would 
not  hear  of  Zwilling's  radicalism,  whereupon  they 
were  immediately  called  to  task  from  the  public  pulpit 
by  this  person.  Karlstadt,  on  the  other  hand,  entered 
with  fiery  zeal  upon  the  fanatical  ideas  of  the  ex-monk 
and  in  spite  of  some  opposition  brought  it  about  that 
a  regulation  to  that  effect  was  on  the  twenty-fourth 
of  January  incorporated  into  the  new  "Statutes  of 
the  City  of  Wittenberg." 

What  are  the  facts  about  this  famous  ordinance, 
the  passing  of  which  may  well  be  called  the  apex  of 
the  Wittenberg  movement?  In  the  first  place,  who 
is  the  author?  The  council,  the  clergy,  Karlstadt, 
Melanchthon  and  other  professors.  Did  the  council 
and  the  professors  possess  any  authority  to  pass  such 
an  instrument?  By  no  means.  They  acted  wholly 
in  self -arrogated  authority  and  in  open  violation  of 
repeated  unmistakable  commands  of  the  Elector. 
That  the  latter  could  not  afford  to  tolerate  such 
disobedience  seems  not  to  have  been  quite  clear  either 
to  the  professors  or  to  the  council.  With  the  best  of 
intentions  they  cheerfully  went  on  reforming,  without 
considering  that  they  had  neither  the  right  nor  the 
power,  nor  were  capable  of  putting  into  effect  their 
new  regulations  against  even  the  will  of  the  Elector, 
should  that  become  necessary. 


FIRST  ATTEMPT  AT  REFORM  165 

What  were  these  reforms?  The  customary  masses 
were  now  abohshed  also  in  the  parish  church,  and  the 
church  building  was  henceforth  closed  during  the 
week.  Only  on  Sundays  and  on  the  holidays  were 
divine  services  and  communion  after  the  method  of 
Karlstadt  to  be  celebrated  in  the  future.  Priests  who 
so  far  had  had  no  other  duty  than  the  reading  of 
masses  were  put  out  of  office.  The  older  ones  among 
them  were  given  an  annual  pension  of  six  gulden,  the 
younger  were  told  to  learn  a  trade.  From  the  income 
of  endowed  masses,  prebends,  the  twenty-one  sodali- 
ties and  the  chapels  connected  with  the  parish  church 
a  "common  chest"  was  formed.  Out  of  this  fund,  to 
which  were  added  also  the  alms  collected  in  the  church, 
not  only  the  salaries  of  the  clergymen,  but  in  addition 
the  expenses  of  the  municipal  poor  relief  were  to  be 
paid.  Begging  is  strictly  forbidden  also  to  monks, 
pupils  and  students.  Since  the  monks  were  leaving 
the  monasteries — there  were  really  only  five  or  six 
left  in  the  Black  Cloister — the  council  directed  them 
to  vacate  their  convents  by  the  thirtieth  of  March 
and  decided  to  make  an  inventory  of  their  goods  and 
income  so  that  disorder  might  be  avoided.  The 
houses  of  ill- fame  were  closed,  the  municipal  brothel 
was  converted  into  a  hospital.  The  inmates  were 
asked  either  to  marry  or  leave  the  city.  The  pictures 
were  removed  from  the  churches  by  the  council  and 
all  but  three  altars  taken  down. 

The  authors  of  the  previous  set  of  articles  might 
well  feel  satisfied  with  this  ordinance  since  all  their 
demands  were  granted  in  the  same.     Even  Luther, 


166  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

however,  would  on  the  whole  have  been  able  to  make 
friends  with  this  statute,  for  it  contained  a  great  deal 
that  he  had  himself  since  1520  preached  unceasingly. 
Only  those  portions  which  are  directly  traceable  to 
Karlstadt,  the  regulations  about  pictures  and  altars 
and  the  new  order  of  service  he  would  not  have  been 
in  a  position  to  accept.  The  direct  introduction  of 
the  new  apostolic  mass  by  force  of  law  at  this  early 
date,  the  fact  that  the  council  following  Karlstadt 
flatly  decreed  that  in  the  eucharist  the  communicants 
must  henceforth  take  the  bread  and  the  cup  with  their 
own  hands,  this  all  ran  counter  to  the  principles  which 
so  far  he  had  strictly  followed  in  such  matters. 

The  worst  defect  of  the  "ordinance,"  however,  was 
that  it  had  come  into  being  in  direct  contravention  of 
the  commands  of  the  Elector.  This  mistake  from  the 
very  outset  jeopardized  the  success  of  the  whole  well- 
intentioned  work  of  reform  which  contained  so  much 
that  was  excellent.  For  the  present,  however,  pros- 
pects seemed  bright.  The  prostitutes  and  beggars 
disappeared  from  the  city.  The  students  who  had  so 
far  lived  by  begging  or  had  studied  in  the  hope  of 
being  well  cared  for  through  prebends,  left  the  uni- 
versity in  large  numbers.  Monks  and  priests  per- 
mitted their  hair  to  grow  over  their  tonsures,  they 
married  and  courageously  endeavored  to  make  their 
living  as  shoemakers,  carpenters,  bakers  and  salt  car- 
ters. Several  members  of  the  electoral  court  also 
voluntarily  gave  up  their  benefices,  and  the  eighteen 
new  municipal  wardens  of  the  poor  were  able  to  enter 
upon  their  duties  without  hindrance. 


FIRST  ATTEMPT  AT  REFORM  167 

One  point  only  brought  on  trouble  and  dissension. 
The  council  had  assumed  the  burdensome  task  of  re- 
moving  the   pictures    and   altars    from   the   parish 
church.     But  it  hesitated    to    fulfill  its  obligation. 
Karlstadt  felt  that  he  could  not  tolerate  this  remiss- 
ness any  longer,  for  him  the  matter  of  images  was 
now  the  foremost  question  of  faith.    Not  only  did  he 
write  about  it  in  a  most  fanatical  manner,  he  also  in 
his    sermons    thundered    passionately    against    this 
abomination  in  the  house  of  the  Lord  and  added  the 
threatening  words:  If  the  government  is  negligent  the 
congregation  has  the  authority  to  assume  powers  of 
self-government  and  from  out  of  commiseration  and 
love  to  undertake  necessary  changes  itself.      It  is 
therefore  not  surprising  that  the  congregation  now  in 
reality  usurped  governmental  authority  on  the  ques- 
tion of  the  images.    On  about  the  sixth  of  February 
an  enraged  mob  broke  into  the  parish  church,  took 
possession  of  the  pictures,  crosses  and  crucifixes  and 
broke,  chopped  up  and  burned  them.    The  council  in- 
terfered on  the  spot,  imprisoned  the  evil-doers  and 
hastily  dispatched  a  courier  to  the  Elector.    However, 
the  mischief  was  done  and  the  news  of  it  soon  pene- 
trated all  the  German  lands. 

Involuntarily  we  ask  ourselves :  Why  did  the  Elec- 
tor calmly  tolerate  all  that  had  happened  in  Witten- 
berg against  his  wishes  and  command  since  the  twenty- 
fifth  of  December?  Partly  because  in  January  he  had 
moved  his  court  to  Allstedt  in  Thuringia.  Not  until 
the  fifth  or  sixth  of  February  did  he  learn  about  the 
occurrences  in  the  city  from  a  complaint  of  the  canons 


168  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

who  adhered  to  the  old  faith  and  from  reports  of  the 
burgomaster  of  Wittenberg  and  his  own  private  sec- 
retary Einsiedel  who  had  once  before,  on  his  own  re- 
sponsibility, unsuccessfully  tried  to  silence  Karlstadt. 
Frederick  instantly  ordered  Einsiedel  to  interfere. 
When  the  latter  received  this  order  the  iconoclastic 
outbreak  had  meanwhile  also  taken  place.  The  mea- 
sures of  the  agent  of  the  Elector  were  correspondingly 
more  energetic.  On  the  thirteenth  of  February  he 
cited  the  professors  Karlstadt,  Jonas,  Melanchthon, 
Amsdorf  and  Eisermann  into  his  presence  at  Eilen- 
burg  and  pressed  them  so  closely  that  all  of  them,  in- 
cluding Karlstadt,  immediately  "toppled  over"  as  the 
saying  goes.  Karlstadt  admitted  that  he  had  caused 
the  iconoclasm  by  his  addresses.  He  declared  himself 
ready  to  avoid  making  such  sermons  in  the  future  and 
to  suffer  punishment  willingly  should  he  fail  to  keep 
his  promise.  Zwilling,  who  alarmed  over  the  effect  of 
his  own  words,  had  already  left  Wittenberg  at  the  time 
of  the  iconoclastic  outbreak,  made  the  same  promise. 

The  chief  point,  however,  was  that  the  professors 
accepted  a  new  "order  of  mass"  in  which  they  relin- 
quished all  their  reforms  with  the  exception  of  conse- 
cration in  the  German  language  and  communion  in 
both  kinds.  What  was  the  significance  of  this  ?  The 
Wittenbergers,  Karlstadt  himself  leading,  themselves 
gave  up  their  "apostolic  mass"  in  its  essential  features 
after  it  had  existed  barely  three  weeks. 

Worse  things,  however,  were  in  store  for  them.  On 
the  eighteenth  or  nineteenth  of  February  an  electoral 
order  arrived  at  Wittenberg  from  Lochau  to  the  effect 


FIRST  ATTEMPT  AT  REFORM  169 

that  the  whole  Catholic  mass  was  to  be  re-established, 
that  is,  even  the  German  consecration  and  com- 
munion in  both  kinds  were  again  to  be  set  aside.  The 
Wittenbergers  could  do  nothing  against  this.  They 
were  completely  done  for.  There  was  only  one  man 
who  might  possibly  still  be  able  to  save  them  from  the 
entanglement  into  which  they  had  fallen  by  their  own 
fault,  one  man  who  might  perchance  be  able  to  conjure 
the  spirit  of  revolt  which  had  taken  possession  of  the 
simple  man  and  the  student  alike  and  to  re-establish 
the  good  relations  with  the  electoral  court.  This  man 
was  Luther.  We  do  not  know  who  first  pointed  this 
out  to  them,  we  do  know,  however,  that  seemingly  as 
early  as  the  twentieth  of  February  the  council  without 
saying  a  word  about  it  to  the  Elector  sent  a  mounted 
messenger  to  the  Wartburg  urgently  inviting  the  Re- 
former to  return  to  Wittenberg  without  delay. 

Luther  had  had  no  news  from  Wittenberg  for 
weeks.  The  greater  now  was  his  indignation.  At 
first  he  believed  that  it  would  be  sufficient  if  he  repri- 
manded the  authors  of  the  mischief  by  letter.  But  the 
longer  he  wrote,  the  more  clearly  he  saw  that  he  would 
have  to  go  personally  to  see  to  things.  He,  therefore, 
in  all  haste  informed  the  Elector,  very  probably  on 
the  same  day,  that  he  would  arrive  directly.  The  old 
gentleman  was  frightened.  He  at  once  commanded 
his  bailiff  Oswald  at  Eisenach  to  make  the  most  ear- 
nest representations  to  the  Doctor  that  he  must  "for 
the  present  by  no  means  betake  himself  to  Witten- 
berg." 

But  Luther  was  not  to  be  held  back  any  longer. 


170  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

Early  on  the  first  of  March  he  departed.  His  state 
of  mind  is  well  illustrated  by  the  famous  letter  which 
on  the  fifth  he  sent  to  the  Elector  from  Borna.  He 
says  that  he  knows  he  is  again  venturing  into  the  field 
of  battle  and  that  in  so  doing  he  is  acting  in  defiance 
of  the  wishes  of  his  master.  He  is  also  aware  that  the 
Elector  will  be  absolutely  unable  to  protect  him  should 
the  imperial  government  feel  inclined  to  execute  the 
sentence  of  outlawry  against  him.  But  Luther 
wanted  no  protection  or  help  from  man.  In  glorious 
words  he  summarily  requests  the  Elector  not  to  give 
him  any  further  aid,  but  to  do  his  duty  toward  the 
Emperor  and  the  Empire,  even  if  he  were  commanded 
to  "apprehend  and  kill  him." 

Some  time  on  the  sixth  of  March  the  Reformer  ar- 
rived in.  Wittenberg.  On  the  next  day  already  the 
Elector  requested  from  him  through  Professor 
Schurpff  a  written  declaration  that  he  had  returned 
to  Wittenberg  "without  Our  leave."  This  statement 
was  to  serve  as  a  measure  of  defense  should  the  ene- 
mies of  the  Elector  raise  their  voice.  Luther  imme- 
diately complied.  Indeed,  in  reference  to  the  wishes 
of  the  old  gentleman  he  even  struck  out  a  number  of 
sentences  that  were  not  exactly  flattering  to  the  im- 
perial government,  and  besides,  had  the  courtier  Spala- 
tin  tone  down  his  vigorous  style  somewhat  to  the  level 
of  the  courtly  manner.  He  could  do  this  without 
being  in  the  least  untruthful.  The  situation  was  ex- 
actly as  he  declared  it  to  be  in  the  improved  version : 
"without  the  knowledge,  will,  aid,  permission  or  pleas- 
ure" of  his  lord  he  had  come  back  to  Wittenberg. 


FIRST  ATTEMPT  AT  REFORM  171 

On  the  ninth  of  March,  Luther  then  again  for  the 
first  time  appeared  in  the  pulpit  of  the  parish  church. 
As  though  he  wished  by  his  dress  to  evidence  how 
httle  such  externals  mattered  to  him  he  again  wore 
the  black  robe  of  the  Augustinians.  He  began  his  dis- 
course as  though  he  were  merely  going  to  expound  the 
prescribed  scriptural  lesson.  Then,  however,  he 
dropped  the  text  and  took  up  "  the  present  business." 
He  avoided  all  direct  polemics  and  mentioned  no 
names.  He  always  spoke  purely  as  the  advo- 
cate of  the  weak  in  faith  to  whom  so  much  of- 
fense had  been  given  by  the  uncharitableness  of 
those  who  deemed  themselves  strong.  That  they 
had  proceeded  blindly  and  in  a  disorderly  man- 
ner, and  that  they  ought  first  to  have  consulted 
the  government,  i.  e.,  the  Elector,  he  only  mentioned 
in  passing.  In  this  same  strain  he  continued  to  preach 
daily  for  a  whole  week.  The  effect  was  tremendous. 
In  the  whole  town  "there  was  great  gladness  and  jubi- 
lation among  the  learned  and  simple  over  his  arrival 
and  preacliing."  Even  Zwilling  confessed  that  "he 
had  erred  and  gone  too  far."  Only  one  person,  Karl- 
stadt,  held  himself  sullenly  aloof.  Thus  the  spirit  of 
unrest  and  the  disorder  in  the  city  and  the  university 
was  subdued. 

Did  not  Luther,  however,  go  a  step  further?  Did  he 
not  at  once  "formally  reinstitute  the  Catholic  ritual"? 
In  reply  it  will  suffice  to  point  to  two  documents  al- 
ready familiar  to  us.  The  one  is  the  "Order  of  Mass 
for  the  City  of  Wittenberg,"  presented  on  the  thir- 
teenth of  February  at  Eilenburg  by  Karlstadt  and  his 


172  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

associates.  It  reintroduces  essentially  the  Catholic 
forms.  The  other  is  the  letter  of  the  Elector,  of  the 
seventeenth  of  February,  which  demanded  outright 
the  abolition  of  all  innovations,  that  is,  also  the  Ger- 
man consecration  and  communion  in  both  kinds.  It 
follows  from  this  that  the  "apostolic  mass"  had  al- 
ready been  abolished  by  consent  of  Karlstadt  when 
Luther  appeared  in  Wittenberg. 

But  the  Catholic  ritual  had  by  no  means  herewith 
been  "formally  reinstituted."  Private  masses  and 
the  canon  of  the  mass,  compulsory  confession,  and 
fasting  remained  undone,  and  communion  in  both 
kinds  quietly  remained  in  force.  Only  at  communion 
services  for  large  numbers  at  Easter  the  participants 
now  again  received  only  the  host.  These  wholesale 
communions  were,  however,  so  distasteful  to  Luther 
that  even  now  he  began  to  take  steps  for  their  aboli- 
tion. 

Much  less  did  anyone  contemplate  doing  away  with 
the  rest  of  the  innovations  of  the  last  months.  The 
new  poor  law  and  morals  police  remained  in  force  un- 
changed. The  monasteries  were  not  restored.  The 
assertion  that  the  Wittenberg  movement  was  replaced 
by  a  blind  reaction  is  therefore  simply  a  mistake. 
Only  in  the  matter  of  cult  was  there  a  backward  step, 
but  what  did  this  retrogression  signify  over  against  the 
progressive  reforms  which  had  been  achieved  along 
these  same  lines,  the  permanence  of  which  was  now 
definitely  assured  through  the  influence  of  Luther! 
For  we  must  not  give  way  to  any  doubt  on  the  point 
that  Luther's  presence  alone  induced  the  Elector  and 


FIRST  ATTEMPT  AT  REFORM  173 

his  councillors  to  again  let  affairs  take  their  own 
course  in  Wittenberg  and  thus  to  clear  the  path  for 
further  reforms. 

That,  according  to  the  sources,  is  the  history  of  the 
"Wittenberg  Unrest"  of  1521-22.  Evidently  it  was 
not  merely  a  question  of  disturbances  in  Wittenberg, 
but  of  a  movement  which  took  hold  also  of  quite  a 
number  of  smaller  places  in  the  neighborhood,  such  as 
Dobien,  Lochau,  Eilenburg,  Schmiedeberg,  Dueben, 
Herzberg  and  Jessen.  Furthermore,  it  was  not  a  rev- 
olutionary rising  in  which  everything  was  turned 
topsy-turvy  but  an  earnest  attempt  to  reform  the  cult, 
the  ecclesiastical  law  and  the  care  of  the  poor  in  ac- 
cordance with  Luther's  principles.  In  the  course  of 
this  endeavor,  it  is  true,  dangerous  excesses  and  dis- 
orders resulted  in  Wittenberg  and  Eilenburg  for  a 
time.  That  this  attempt  was  only  half -successful  is 
the  fault  neither  of  Luther  nor  of  the  principles  he 
represented.  It  was  solely  due  to  the  incapacity  and 
stubborn  narrowness  of  the  men  who  set  themselves 
up  as  leaders  of  the  movement  without  even  recog- 
nizing that  a  reform  without  Luther's  knowledge  and 
against  the  will  and  wish  of  the  Elector  was  impos- 
sible. That  this  was  clearly  established,  that  there 
could  be  no  further  doubt  about  how  little  could  in 
these  matters  be  done  without  the  aid  of  the  "govern- 
ment," as  Luther  says,  this  was  unquestionably  also  a 
success  of  the  "movement." 

Is  this  not  giving  too  little  credit  to  Karlstadt? 
Was  he  really  no  more  than  a  blind  zealot?  Can  he 
on  good  grounds  be  designated  as  the  "Calvinist" 


174  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

among  the  Wittenberg  group  and  as  the  real  father 
of  Puritanism?  No.  Of  the  foremost  characteristic 
of  Calvinistic  and  Puritan  piety,  the  zeal  for  the  puri- 
fication and  sanctification  of  morals,  neither  he  nor 
Zwilling  afford  any  trace.  The  energy  of  both  is 
rather  absorbed  altogether  by  the  struggle  against 
idolatry  in  the  forms  of  worship.  That  which  consti- 
tutes the  greatness  of  Puritan  piety  they  lack  en- 
tirely, only  its  weakness,  the  legalistic  and  fanatic 
strain,  we  already  find  clearly  expressed  in  them. 

One  might  rather  be  tempted  to  call  the  framers  of 
the  Articles  of  December  9,  1521,  Puritans.  For 
they  were  earnestly  concerned  about  the  purification 
and  sanctifying  of  morals.  But,  after  all,  they  ask 
only  what  Luther  had  long  ago  demanded,  they  were 
merely  zealous  Lutherans.  The  fact  that  they  were 
laymen  is  by  no  means  a  sufficient  reason  to  charac- 
terize their  proceeding  with  the  weighty  appellation 
of  lay-Christian  Puritanism.  There  have  been  such 
zealous  Lutherans  at  all  times  among  the  laity  and 
the  fact  that  a  number  of  them  are  found  also  among 
the  laymen  of  Wittenberg  after  Luther  had  preached 
there  so  long  is  hardly  cause  for  wonderment.  At 
most  one  ought  to  feel  surprised  that  the  Wittenberg 
laity  began  to  show  signs  of  awakening  so  late  and 
that  they  so  quickly  sank  back  into  their  accustomed 
lethargy  after  they  had  used  up  their  enthusiasm  in  a 
few  riots.  However,  anyone  who  knows  this  land  and 
its  people  will  not  feel  surprised  at  this  but  always  be 
amazed  again  over  the  fact  that  Luther  was  able  at 
this  place  and  from  out  of  this  center,  in  whose  cool 


FIRST  ATTEMPT  AT  REFORM  175 

temperature  the  germs  of  a  higher  Hfe  thrive  with  so 
much  difficulty,  to  exert  such  a  mighty  influence. 
This  he  himself  felt  very  strongly  and  stated  very 
frankly.  For  Luther  never  took  part  in  the  catering 
to  the  "small  man"  which  was  so  in  vogue  at  the  time. 
He  justly  shook  his  head  over  the  affected  rusticizing 
with  which  Karlstadt  as  the  **new  layman,"  after 
the  fashion  of  Tolstoi,  tried  to  ingratiate  himself  with 
peasants  and  craftsmen.  Even  before  the  Peasant 
Revolt  he  told  this  "small  man"  the  plain  and  unvar- 
nished truth.  The  fact  that  he  is  to-day  still  criticized 
for  this  does  not  prove  that  he  was  wrong,  but  only 
that  in  place  of  the  "small  man"  as  he  really  is  people 
are  wont  to  exhibit  for  public  reverence  an  abstract 
personification  of  all  citizen  and  peasant  virtues,  such 
as  one  never  encounters  in  real  life. 


CHAPTER  VI. 

Luther  as  a  Scholar  and  Author, 

OINCE  the  appearance  of  Janssen's  "History  of 
^  the  German  People"  no  historical  work  has  caused 
such  a  stir  in  Germany  as  Heinrich  Denifle's  "Luther 
and  Lutheranism  in  its  Earliest  Development  Pre- 
sented on  the  Basis  of  the  Sources,"  of  which  the  first 
volume  appeared  in  Mayence  in  1904.  Both  Catho- 
lics and  Protestants  were  at  first  equally  astonished 
over  the  book.  Then  there  followed  on  the  Protestant 
side  a  veritable  storm  of  indignation,  a  flood  of  coun- 
ter-treatises, a  lively  debate  in  the  scientific  journals, 
in  the  weekly  and  daily  press.  However,  in  Catholic 
circles  also  the  work  met  almost  nowhere  with  undi- 
vided approval.  Individual  scholars  unqualifiedly 
repudiated  it,  others  let  it  pass  only  after  sharp  criti- 
cism. No  reader  who  was  able  to  judge  for  himself 
was  wholly  in  accord  with  it. 

When  we  pick  up  the  book,  which  meanwhile  has 
been  continued  in  a  loftier  strain  by  Grisar  in  his 
"Luther"  we  are  at  first  somewhat  surprised  at  the 
excitement  caused  by  its  publication.  Like  Grisar's 
work  it  is  not  at  all  a  sensational  piece  of  writing  after 
the  common  understanding  of  that  term.  Indeed, 
it  is  not  really  a  book  at  all  but  a  collection  of  very 
learned  and  ofttimes  very  poorly  arranged  essays  on 
various  problems  of  research  concerning  Luther.  The 
176 


LUTHER  AS  SCHOLAR  AND  AUTHOR  177 

specialist  can  learn  a  great  deal  from  these  papers. 
However,  the  opinion  of  the  specialist  never  decides 
the  success  of  such  books  but  rather  the  manner  of 
presentation  and  the  tendency  they  serve.  With 
Denifle  this  leaning  is  sufficiently  evident  from  the 
emphatic  closing  words:  "Away  from  Luther,  and 
back  to  the  Church."  In  Grisar's  work  it  appears 
more  from  the  grouping  and  treatment  of  the  facts, 
from  the  interpretation  and  the  at  times  incomplete 
use  of  the  documents.  Both  authors,  nevertheless, 
have  the  honest  conviction  that  they  have  proceeded 
in  their  work  in  a  strictly  historical  and  psychological 
manner,  and  that  at  last  they  are  able  to  place  before 
the  eyes  of  the  long  misguided  public  the  "true 
Luther." 

The  portrait  of  their  true  Luther,  however,  espe- 
cially in  Denifle,  differs  decidedly  from  that  hitherto 
presented  by  the  "unscientific"  old-Catholic  investiga- 
tors. Before  the  judgment-seat  of  "science"  Luther 
in  the  first  place  reveals  himself  as  a  crass  ignoramus, 
further,  he  also  appears  as  a  glutton  and  inebriate  of 
the  lowest  type,  as  a  bestial  profligate,  ribald  and  buf- 
foon of  the  worst  sort,  as  a  literary  dirt  slinger  worse 
than  Zola,  as  an  audacious  forger,  liar  and  cheat,  in 
short,  as  an  individual  dangerous  to  society,  un- 
equalled for  "moral  degeneracy." 

To  the  specialist  this  portrait  is  in  its  main  features 
not  very  new.  He  is  quite  familiar  with  it  from  the 
Catholic  polemics  of  the  sixteenth  to  the  eighteenth 
centuries  whose  preliminary  labors  the  learned  Father 
has  thoroughly  and  thankfully  used.    Only  the  crass 


178  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

ignoramus  is  a  new  discovery  made  by  Denifle.  For 
the  rest  the  learned  father  has  been  content  merely 
to  put  on  the  colors  a  trifle  more  heavily  and  coarsely, 
to  bring  out  the  detail  somewhat  more  fully,  and  in 
this  wise  to  freshen  up  the  old  picture  so  as  to  make  it 
look  as  imposing  as  possible.  Grisar  evinces  much 
less  temperament.  He  endeavors  to  do  justice  also 
to  the  "good  sides"  of  his  subject,  and  he  discards  a 
number  of  the  exaggerated  verdicts  of  the  old  con- 
troversialists. For  this  very  reason,  however,  his  book 
fell  short  of  making  an  impression  commensurate  to 
that  of  Denifle's  work.  At  any  rate,  the  latter's  crude 
woodcut  in  the  style  of  Murner  has  so  far  not  been 
supplanted  by  Grisar's  much  fainter  pencil  drawing 
which  in  spite  of  its  more  than  a  thousand  pages  fails 
after  all  to  make  up  a  clear  picture.  Hence  it  is  still 
advisable  to  cite  the  Luther  of  Denifle  who  lives  in 
so  many  minds  before  the  "judge's  bench"  and  to  de- 
termine which  features  have  been  correctly  or  falsely 
observed.  In  most  cases  the  result  furnishes  an  esti- 
mate also  on  those  points  in  which  Grisar  has  further 
developed  Denifle's  materials. 

We  fittingly  begin  with  Luther,  the  crass  igno- 
ramus whose  unmasking  cost  the  learned  Dominican 
so  much  effort  and  time  and  over  the  discovery  of 
whom  he  is  so  extraordinarily  proud.  We  therefore 
inquire  directly:  Did  the  Reformer  really  pass  so 
unsatisfactorily  the  many  tests  to  which  he  was  sub- 
sequently subjected?  O.  G.  Schmidt  has  quizzed  him 
on  the  classical  literature  of  the  Greeks  and  Romans. 
In  this  examination  the  Reformer  stood  well.    Truly, 


LUTHER  AS  SCHOLAR  AND  AUTHOR  179 

he  is  not  familiar  with  the  Greek  poets  and  prose 
writers  though  he  procured  an  edition  of  Homer  as 
late  as  1523  "that  he  might  become  a  Greek."  In- 
stead, he  was  very  well  versed  in  the  favorite  Latin 
authors  of  the  day:  Vergil,  Terence,  Ovid,  uEsop, 
Cicero,  Livy,  Seneca,  Horace,  Catullus,  Juvenal, 
Silius,  Statins,  Lucan,  Suetonius,  Sallust,  Quintilian, 
Varro,  Pomponius  Mela,  the  two  Plinies  and  the 
Germania  of  Tacitus.  In  addition  he,  of  course, 
knew  the  very  popular  Neo-Latinists  Baptista  Man- 
tuanus,  Filelfo  and  others.  In  a  similar  manner 
Schaefer  and  W.  Koehler  investigated  his  knowledge 
of  General  History  and  Church  History.  This  test 
also  he  passed  creditably,  for  it  appears  that  he  was 
very  much  interested  in  history  and  at  times  pursued 
very  serious  historical  studies. 

Finally,  Father  Denifle  examined  him  in  Scholastic 
Philosophy  and  Theology.  The  result :  Failure !  The 
candidate  knows  only  the  pseudo-philosophers  and 
theologians  of  the  dechning  Middle  Ages.  The 
Prince  of  Scholastics,  St.  Thomas  of  Aquinas,  he 
did  not  study  at  all  at  the  university  and  later  on 
for  controversial  purposes  only.  To  make  the  situa- 
tion worse  the  accused  has  the  front  to  assert:  "I  have 
been  brought  up  on  Scholasticism,  I  know  Scholas- 
ticism," and  boasts  shamelessly:  "I  have  read  thousand 
and  all  doctors."  This  indeed  sounds  very  badly. 
But  is  the  severe  examiner  right?  Not  at  all.  As 
regards  the  bragging  statement — made  in  a  marginal 
note — Denifle  for  once  (inter'dum  dormit  Homerus) 
has  permitted  himself  to  be  misled  by  a  misprint.    In 


180  LUTHER  IN  LIGPIT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

the  original  manuscript  we  read  not  legi,  "I  have  read," 
but  lege,  "read  thousand  and  all  doctors,  no  one  will 
solve  the  question  better." 

Also  it  has  been  proven  that  Luther  as  a  student 
did  read  the  "Prince  of  Scholastics,"  and  not  only  his 
commentary  on  the  Sentences  but  also  the  large  and 
small  edition  of  the  Summa.  ( See  Veit  Dietrich,  No. 
280.)  Furthermore,  he  studied  Peter  Lombard, 
Bernard  of  Clairvaux,  Duns  Skotus,  Okkam,  Greg- 
ory of  Rimini,  Pierre  d'Ailly,  Gerson  and  Biel  so 
assiduously  that  he  knew,  for  instance,  d'Ailly  and 
Biel  almost  by  heart.  Therefore  he  really  knew  Scho- 
lasticism, whereby  we  do  not  mean  to  say  that  he  al- 
ways correctly  understood,  for  example,  Thomas 
Aquinas.  However,  occasional  errors  in  interpreta- 
tion by -an  author  are  certainly  not  a  sufficient  basis 
for  the  verdict  "crass  ignorance."  If  that  were  the 
case  we  would  also  have  to  call  the  learned  Father 
Denifle  a  crass  ignoramus  because  he  so  often  misin- 
terpreted Luther. 

But  the  Reformer  is  not  only  familiar  with  Scho- 
lasticism, he  also  "had  read  most  everything"  by  Au- 
gustine; furthermore,  if  not  all,  at  least  considerable 
portions  of  Irenaeus,  Cyprian,  Eusebius,  Athanasius, 
Hilary,  Ambrose,  Gregory  of  Nazianza,  Jerome, 
Cassiodorus,  Gregory  the  Great  and  Anselm  of  Can- 
terbury. In  addition  he  had  made  quite  a  close  study 
of  Tauler  and  the  Frankfurt  Anonymous  and  among 
Humanistic  theologians  of  Lef  evre,  Erasmus  and  Pico 
della  Mirandola.  He  was  also  quite  at  home  in  the 
exegetical  literature  of  the  Middle  Ages,  in  the  Canon 


LUTHER  AS  SCHOLAR  AND  AUTHOR  181 

Law,  in  Aristotle  and  Porphyry.  Finally,  he  was  one 
of  the  first  German  professors  who  learned  Greek  and 
Hebrew  and  zealously  and  successfully,  as  his  last  lec- 
tures still  prove,  endeavored  to  gather  information 
about  rabbinical  literature  and  exegesis  from  Jews 
and  Proselytes.  All  this  Denifle  ignores  because  it 
does  not  fit  into  his  preconceived  opinion.  Indeed,  he 
is  inclined  rather  to  reproach  the  "crass  ignoramus" 
because  he  failed  to  use  original  manuscripts,  and  did 
not  think  of  correcting  the  misprints  in  the  poor  Basel 
edition  of  the  Church  fathers  to  which  alone  he  had 
access. 

Upon  close  scrutiny  the  crass  ignoramus,  therefore, 
reveals  himself  as  a  very  sound  and  respectable  scholar, 
However,  as  is  well  known,  mere  learning  alone  does 
not  produce  a  good  professor.  A  good  professor  re- 
sults only  if  to  erudition  be  added  something  higher: 
the  faculty  of  plain,  clear,  correct  and  independent 
thought,  resourcefulness,  acumen,  in  short,  scientific 
talent.  Did  the  Reformer  also  possess  these  quali- 
ties? He  himself  would  perhaps  not  have  answered 
this  question  in  the  affirmative.  As  a  scholar  and 
teacher  he  appeared  to  himself  always  as  weak,  poor 
and  small,  a  mere  "prattler"  over  against  the  remark- 
able little  man,  Melanchthon.  However,  he  had  no 
cause  for  such  a  poor  estimate  of  himself.  True,  he 
was  not  a  Humanist  like  that  "doctor  above  all  doc- 
tors." Just  as  his  hand  in  the  "ductus"  and  in  the 
form  of  the  letters  never  quite  lost  the  stamp  of  the 
monkish  script  of  the  fifteenth  century,  so  also  his 
Latin,  vivid  and  natural  though  it  be,  ever  retained  a 


182  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

monkish  tinge.  He  also  never  acquired  in  the  same 
measure  as  his  younger  friend  that  facility  of  ex- 
pressing an  idea  "neatly  and  tersely"  and  yet  "clearly 
and  fully."  But  since  1513  he  gradually  learned  from 
the  Humanists  for  his  scientific  labors  on  the  Bible 
all  that  they  could  teach  him.  And  as  far  as  critical 
acumen  is  concerned  he  was  at  least  the  equal  of  the 
renowned  Erasmus  and  considerably  superior  to 
Magister  Philippus. 

Already  as  a  young  professor,  Luther  ventured  for 
linguistic  and  internal  reasons  to  designate  as  spurious 
five  treatises  which  had  been  handed  down  under  the 
name  of  St.  Augustine.  Thereby  he  excited  unpleas- 
ant notoriety  in  Wittenberg,  in  one  case  at  least,  in 
fact,  he  made  enemies  for  himself.  Later  investiga- 
tion, however,  has  completely  confirmed  his  judg- 
ment. Equally  apt  and  surprising  are  his  famous  re- 
marks about  the  style,  provenance  and  historical  value 
of  the  biblical  books.  Though  he  in  this  respect  fol- 
lowed in  the  main  the  verdict  of  the  great  scholars  of 
the  ancient  church,  Eusebius  of  Csesarea  and  Jerome, 
he  yet  added  a  mass  of  striking  observations  and  acute 
suppositions  of  his  own.  What  is  most  important,  he 
at  once  without  lengthy  parley  draws  from  the  critical 
results  the  correct  conclusions.  He  hmits  the  canon  of 
the  Old  Testament  to  the  writings  of  the  Hebrew 
Bible  and  in  the  New  Testament  allows  the  four  old 
"anti-legomena,"  James,  Jude,  Hebrews  and  the 
Apocalypse  henceforth  to  count  only  as  an  appendix. 

Even  as  an  interpreter  of  Scriptures,  however,  Lu- 
ther achieved  a  great  deal  more  than  is  usually  sus- 


LUTHER  AS  SCHOLAR  AND  AUTHOR  183 

pected.  He  is,  if  not  the  first,  at  least  one  of  the  first 
professors  who  in  their  work  of  expounding  the  Bible 
as  a  matter  of  principle  followed  the  original  text. 
Further  he  as  early  as  1520  from  principle  tabooed  all 
the  ecclesiastical  methods  of  interpretation  and  sup- 
planted these  falsely  famous  arts  by  "natural,  gram- 
matical and  historical"  exegesis.  In  his  opinion  it  is 
not  the  Church  which  ought  to  determine  what  Scrip- 
ture teaches,  but  the  Word  of  God  ought  to  fix  the 
doctrine  of  the  Church.  These  are  deeds  which  for  all 
time  assure  him  a  place  in  the  history  of  scholarship. 
Even  in  the  more  minute  interpretation,  however, 
one  is  again  and  again  astonished  at  the  amount  he 
was  able  to  accompHsh  with  his  poor  auxiliaries.  We 
wonder  also  at  his  fine  ear  for  the  linguistic  pecu- 
liarities of  the  text  and  marvel  over  the  assurance 
with  which  he  not  only  knew  how  to  develop  the  re- 
ligious ideas  but  also  the  theological  concepts.  If, 
besides,  we  add  to  the  picture  the  ease  and  dexterity 
with  which  he  moved  amidst  the  most  abstract  philo- 
sophical and  theological  distinctions,  the  rapidity  with 
which  he  worked  into  not  merely  the  theological  but 
also  the  political,  legal,  social  and  economic  problems 
with  which  he  was  brought  face  to  face  by  the  progress 
of  the  Evangelical  movement,  and  note  how  quickly 
and  without  effort  he  always  found  for  his  ideas  a 
striking  and  original  expression  how  easily,  thanks 
to  his  enormous  memory,  he  retained  in  mind  whatever 
he  had  read,  seen  or  heard,  we  will  be  forced  to  con- 
fess that  even  regarded  purely  as  an  intellectual  char- 
acter he  was  a  phenomenon  without  equal. 


184  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

Only  one  gift  had  been  vouchsafed  him  in  a  rela- 
tively small  degree,  the  very  talent  which  he  so  much 
admired  in  Melanchthon  and  would  have  admired  still 
more  in  Calvin  had  he  become  more  closely  acquainted 
with  this  greatest  scientific  force  of  early  Protes- 
tantism. This  was  the  faculty  of  mastering,  syste- 
matically organizing  and  condensing  into  brief  for- 
mulas the  prodigious  wealth  of  fertile  ideas  which 
poured  in  upon  him  unbidden  from  all  sides  while  he 
was  at  work  and  even  when  engaged  merely  in  light 
conversation. 

These  considerations  alone  raise  some  suspicion 
against  the  modern  attempts  to  set  down  the  Re- 
former as  a  powerful  but  uncouth  bit  of  primeval 
nature  which,  suddenly  rising  up  from  out  of  the 
depths  of  nationality,  all  at  once  broke  in  upon  the 
blooming  fields  of  culture  with  destructive  force.  Nor 
do  we  for  the  reasons  given  above  take  kindly  to  the 
other  suggestion  that  he  was  at  the  very  least  a  "simple 
soul,"  a  "northerner"  deficient  in  culture,  "who  had 
thus  far  vegetated  on  in  snow  and  fog  and  amidst 
the  inclemencies  of  nature  without  any  great  need  for 
scholarship  and  without  a  glimmer  of  art." 

This  primordial  man,  this  simple  soul  was  after  all 
not  quite  so  uncouth,  one-sided  and  northern  as  it 
seems  to  the  outsider.  To  be  sure,  when  Luther 
wishes  to  state  the  value  of  science  and  art  in  life 
he  is  unable  to  say  more  than  that  the  former  is  in- 
dispensable for  the  secular  and  ecclesiastical  govern- 
ment and  that  art  inculcates  valuable  lessons  in  a 
visual  form.    But  utilitarian  considerations  like  these 


LUTHER  AS  SCHOLAR  AND  AUTHOR  185 

are  in  the  sixteenth  century  found  even  with  really 
scientific  natures  like  Melanchthon  and  in  very  great 
artists  like  Albrecht  Diirer.  They  only  go  to  prove 
how  naive  and  natural  the  relation  of  this  age  still  was 
to  science  and  art,  but  not  that  people  at  this  time  did 
not  yet  possess  a  true  understanding  of  these  branches 
of  culture.  This  is  especially  manifest  also  in  the  case 
of  Luther.  Though  he  in  other  things  tenaciously 
holds  to  the  Okkamist  theory  of  knowledge  he  has 
already  quite  overcome  the  view  of  Okkam  that  there 
is  but  one  science,  logic,  and  has  also  thrown  aside  the 
indifference  of  the  Okkamists  to  the  languages,  his- 
tory and  the  exact  sciences.  Quite  to  the  contrary,  he 
values  and  recommends  these  sciences  as  noble  arts 
and  disciplines  and  himself  works  in  the  field  of  lan- 
guage as  energetically  as  he  can. 

While  Luther  thus  manifests  a  distinct  need  for 
scientific  activity  he  also  possesses  more  than  a  mere 
glimmering  of  art.  Music  he  loves  and  practices  with 
great  zeal,  not  because  it  is  useful,  but  because  it  is 
the  greatest  earthly  pleasure  and  the  finest  gift  with 
which  God  has  adorned  this  miserable  life.  Further, 
he  is  also  fond  of  the  art  of  poetry  and  exercises  it, 
not  alone  because  Poetry  is  an  able  preceptress,  but 
also  because  poems  more  profoundly  move  and  delight 
him  personally  and  remain  more  deeply  impressed 
upon  his  soul  than  all  common  speech,  be  it  even  that 
of  a  Demosthenes  or  Cicero.  Therefore  Luther  not 
only  derived  great  pleasure  from  proverbs  and  the 
fables  of  ^sop  but  also  from  poems  not  directly  of  a 
didactic  nature,  as  for  instance,  the  songs  about  Diet- 


186  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

rich  of  Bern  and  "other  giants."  For  the  same  reason 
he  himself  greatly  loved  to  wi*ite  little  verses  even 
while  engaged  in  so  prosaic  an  occupation  as  the  keep- 
ing of  his  household  accounts.  And  though  as  a  com- 
poser of  hymns  he  mainly  followed  pedagogical  pur- 
poses he  is  at  times,  though  but  seldom,  overcome  by 
the  impulse  for  once  to  let  his  powerful  emotions  flow 
forth  freely  in  song.  At  such  times  he  always  sings 
like  a  really  great  poet  in  strains  the  like  of  which  had 
never  been  heard  before  him  in  the  German  tongue. 

Luther  was  less  interested  in  the  plastic  arts  and  in 
architecture,  though  he  appreciated  the  beautiful  also 
if  he  met  it  in  this  form.  In  Rome  he  viewed  with 
wonderment  the  splendid  palaces  of  the  cardinals,  the 
Pantheon,  the  Colosseum  and  the  Baths  of  Diocletian. 
His  interest  was  also  aroused  by  the  delicate  manner 
in  which  the  Italian  painters  were  able  to  reproduce 
nature  and  expression,  and  by  the  beautiful  coloring 
employed  by  the  Flemish  artists.  For  plastic  art 
alone  he  seems  to  have  had  no  sense,  though  he  fre- 
quently enough  praises  the  beauty  of  the  human  form, 
and  lauds  the  Italian  tailors  with  great  warmth  be- 
cause they  know  how  to  fit  the  clothes  to  the  human 
body,  whereas  the  Germans  made  all  trousers  after  one 
model  so  that  their  customers  strut  about  like  tum- 
bler pigeons.  Considering  all  this  one  can  certainly 
not  assert  that  he  lacked  "even  a  glimmer  of  art," 
though  on  the  other  hand  it,  of  course,  does  not  justify 
the  claim  that  he  possessed  a  fine  artistic  appreciation. 
Nevertheless,  we  can  well  say  that  the  naive  pleasure 
in  art  which  is  so  characteristic  of  the  whole  age  is 


LUTHER  AS  SCHOLAR  AND  AUTHOR         187 

shared  also  by  Luther,  especially  the  delight  in  pretty 
pictures.  Otherwise  the  busy  man  would  hardly  have 
gone  to  the  trouble  of  personally  selecting  the  wood- 
cuts for  the  so-called  September  Bible. 

While  thus  not  devoid  of  a  sense  of  artistic 
appreciation,  the  Reformer  also  did  not  confront 
nature  with  "clouded  and  fettered  sensibilities." 
Though  in  his  belief  devilish  forces  infested  river 
and  forest,  the  regions  above  and  below  the  earth, 
this  fact  did  not  make  nature  as  such  seem  un- 
canny to  him,  much  less  render  it  a  waste  gray 
chaos  of  snow,  fog,  and  formless  northern  night. 
In  spite  of  Satan  it  always  remains  in  his  eyes  a  green 
garden  of  pleasure,  full  of  sunshine,  clear  songs  of 
birds  and  thousands  upon  thousands  of  great  and 
small  miracles  of  God,  like  his  native  land  Thuringia, 
where  the  timid  boy  first  learned  to  look  cheerfully 
about  himself  and  grew  up  to  be  a  nimble  and  happy 
young  fellow. 

As  in  his  conception  of  nature  so  also  in  his  feeling 
for  nature  we  can  detect  the  true  Thuringian.  The 
song-birds,  especially,  have  grown  dear  to  his  heart 
as  they  are  loved  even  now  by  all  true  children  of  the 
forest.  Ever  again  Luther  watches  with  solemn  de- 
light the  playing  of  the  "gentle"  deer  and  roe,  and  as 
frequently  as  possible  he  makes  trips  into  the  open, 
or  goes  into  the  woods  for  the  happy  hunt,  not  to 
murder  innocent  animals  but  quietly  in  the  green  soli- 
tude to  observe  God's  wonders,  or  amidst  the  troating 
of  the  deer  to  meditate  upon  the  psalm:  As  the  hart 
panteth  after  the  water  brooks. 


188  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

Whoever  wishes  rightly  to  understand  Luther  must 
seek  him  not  only  in  church,  in  the  lecture-room  or  in  his 
study,  must  observe  him  not  alone  when  speaking  and 
writing,  he  must  watch  him  when  chaffing  with  wife 
and  children,  arguing  with  his  companions  at  table,  or 
when  in  a  quiet  moment  with  his  own  hands  he  repairs 
his  trousers  by  sewing  on  patches  from  the  jerkin  of 
his  son  "Haensichen"  ;he  must  follow  him  also  through 
woods  and  fields  and  accompany  him  into  the  garden 
and  courtyard  of  the  Black  Cloister.  There  he  will 
see  the  mighty  one  who  perhaps  a  moment  ago,  crude 
**as  with  a  peasant's  ax,"  had  struck  vicious  blows  at 
the  Pope,  very  peacefully,  like  an  old  country  parson, 
sowing  and  weeding,  grafting  and  inoculating,  or 
studying  with  solicitous  eyes  his  giant  radishes  from 
Erfurt  and  his  "strange"  mulberry  and  fig-trees.  He 
will  further  notice  him  in  childlike  innocence  playing 
with  his  little  dog  Toelpel  or  musingly  regarding  the 
comfortable  ease  of  the  hogs  in  Frau  Katie's  stable- 
yard.  Again,  he  will  see  him  at  the  hive  attentively 
watching  the  bees  gather  honey,  or  in  the  bushes  ob- 
serving the  birds  building  their  nests ;  or  perchance  he 
will  discover  him  wandering  out  into  the  green  woods 
singing  and  shouting  like  a  student.  One  who  has 
thus  seen  him  will  henceforth  not  be  in  the  least  as- 
tonished at  the  fact  that  "the  naive  barbarian"  under- 
stood so  "clearly  and  roundly"  in  flowing  description 
and  in  fleeting  banter  to  reproduce  impressions  of 
nature.  He  will  recognize  rather  that  this  "bar- 
barian" in  his  own  way  was  a  poet  and  an  artist, 
though  he  was  far  from  being  able  in  emulation  of  his 


LUTHER  AS  SCHOLAR  AND  AUTHOR         189 

critic  Dilthey  to  give  definite  information  on  what 
"the  poet"  and  "the  artist"  may,  can  and  should  do. 

Despite  all  this,  it  would  appear  as  though  the  un- 
couth "barbarian"  Luther  were  not  an  arbitrary  in- 
vention of  polemic  writers.  As  a  writer  and  speaker 
Luther  even  according  to  unbiased  witnesses  deserves 
no  other  characterization.  Indeed  "uncouth  barba- 
rian" is  seemingly  still  an  altogether  too  timid  expres- 
sion. A  whole  army  of  passionate  judges  assures  us 
that  we  will  strike  a  great  deal  closer  to  the  mark  if 
we  call  him:  Champion  boor,  dirty  fellow,  pig,  buf- 
foon, bawd,  literary  dirt-shnger,  lubber  and  pornog- 
rapher.  It  is  claimed  that  the  literary  legacy  of  Lu- 
ther sufficiently  justifies  these  honorable  epithets.  It 
is,  however,  hardly  necessary  to  go  to  the  trouble  of 
hunting  up  proofs  in  his  writings  and  letters.  A 
widely  known  source,  which  is  read  a  good  deal  even 
in  popular  editions,  offers  them  in  lavish  profusion,  a 
source  which  seems  to  present  the  Reformer  to  our 
eyes  in  his  every-day  garments  without  pose  or  color- 
ing— the  famous  Table  Talk.  Modern  research  has 
very  thoroughly  studied  this  source  also  and  has  solved 
many,  though  unhappily  not  all  of  the  riddles  which 
it  offers  to  the  historian.  We  are  here  interested  in 
the  results  obtained  only  in  as  far  as  they  help  us  to 
answer  the  question :  Do  we  really  learn  to  know  the 
genuine  Luther  best  in  the  Table  Talk? 

Ever  since  the  end  of  the  second  decade  of  the  six- 
teenth century  a  regular  Round  Table  of  companions 
collected  about  the  Reformer  in  the  Black  Cloister  late 
every  afternoon  at  five  o'clock  for  the  evening  meal. 


190  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

Truly,  the  Knights  of  this  Round  Table  bore  no  high- 
sounding  names.  In  the  main  they  were  poor,  older 
students,  who  had  their  board  and  rooms  in  the  house. 
Some  belonged  to  the  wider  family  circle  as  famuli 
of  the  Doctor,  others  as  teachers  of  the  children ;  the 
rest  were  boarders  whom  Luther's  spouse  had  taken 
into  the  house  in  order  to  help  out  the  family  ex- 
chequer. One  of  these  latter,  Conrad  Cordatus  from 
Weisskirchen,  in  Austria,  first  hit  upon  the  idea  of 
immediately  noting  down  then  and  there  the  remarks 
made  by  Luther  at  the  table.  That  was  in  the  summer 
of  1531.  Since  Luther  raised  no  objections  his  exam- 
ple was  immediately  followed  by  others. 

The  company  at  table  consequently  sometimes  re- 
sembled a  lecture,  so  assiduously  were  John  Schlagin- 
haufen,  -Veit  Dietrich,  Anton  Lauterbach,  Jerome 
Weller,  the  melancholy  private  tutor  of  little  Hans, 
and  since  the  early  forties  John  Mathesius,  Caspar 
Heydenreich,  Jerome  Besold,  John  Aurifaber  and 
many  others  engaged  in  copying  down  into  their  mem- 
oranda the  conversation  of  the  Doctor  and  of  other 
table  companions. 

Very  soon,  however,  these  men  ceased  merely  to 
take  notes.  They  carefully  copied  their  jottings,  sup- 
plemented the  brief  catchwords  from  memory  and 
converted  their  notes  into  well-written  reports.  These 
copies  thej^  then  frequently  exchanged.  Indeed,  in- 
dividual collectors,  who  were  especially  zealous,  as,  for 
example,  Anton  Lauterbach,  began  even  during  the 
lifetime  of  the  Doctor  to  arrange  their  collections  top- 
ically.   Nevertheless,  none  of  the  older  table  compan- 


LUTHER  AS  SCHOLAR  AND  AUTHOR  191 

ions  thought  of  publishing  these  collectanea.  They 
were  proud  of  their  treasure  and  willingly  furnished 
information  from  it  to  admirers  of  Luther,  but  in  the 
correct  feeling  that  the  Reformer  himself  would  not 
have  approved  of  it  they  made  no  attempt  to  give  the 
larger  public  access  to  it. 

Only  John  Aurifaber,  the  last  famulus  of  the  Doc- 
tor, who  otherwise  also,  trafficked  in  relics  of  Luther 
did  not  regard  it  out  of  place  to  acquire  glory  and 
money  by  means  of  these  copies.  His  large  edition  of 
the  Table  Talk,  which  appeared  in  1566,  was  indeed 
such  an  immediate  success  that  soon  other  enterprising 
literati  published  similar  and  equally  valuable  collec- 
tions. Was  this  success  merited?  The  answer  can 
only  be  in  the  negative.  Aurifaber  was  able  to  use 
his  own  notes  only  for  the  last  two  years  of  Luther's 
life.  Even  these  he  did  not  reproduce  accurately. 
He  transposed  the  mixture  of  German  and  Latin 
which  was  spoken  at  Luther's  table  into  his  own  broad 
and  wordy  German,  and  since  he  was  himself  a  very 
crude  person  he  did  not  neglect  to  emphasize  the 
strong  terms  occurring  in  the  original.  In  the  same 
fashion  he  thereupon  edited  the  notes  of  several  older 
associates.  Where  did  he  get  these?  Not  from  the 
original  manuscripts  or  from  the  first  copies,  but  from 
collections  of  the  second  and  third  hand,  in  which  the 
chronological  sequence  of  the  remarks  had  been  alto- 
gether destroyed  and  the  utterances  themselves  more 
or  less  retouched.  Besides,  he  was  a  very  hasty  and 
wholly  uncritical  editor.  His  edition  of  the  Table 
Talk  is  therefore  a  rather  turbid  fountain  from  which 


192  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

no  one  who  is  accustomed  to  the  fresh  water  of  genuine 
tradition  can  drink  without  reluctance. 

However,  is  access  to  the  true  tradition  in  these  mat- 
ters at  all  open  to  us  ?  In  the  last  decades  the  collec- 
tions of  a  number  of  the  older  table  companions  have 
been  made  accessible,  the  notes  of  Cordatus,  Lauter- 
bach,  Schlaginhaufen,  IMathesius,  Veit  Dietrich,  Wel- 
ler  and  others.  However,  none  of  these,  not  even  that 
of  Veit  Dietrich,  always  faithfully  offers  the  original 
version.  Even  the  three  best  are  merely  copies  of 
those  modest  little  memoranda  by  means  of  which  the 
table  companions  rapidly  fixed  the  utterances  of  the 
Doctor.  In  addition,  the  ablest  among  the  many  in- 
dustrious fellows:  Roerer,  Dietrich,  Lauterbach  and 
Mathesius  were  despite  their  facile  pens  at  the  very 
first  writing  not  insured  against  errors  of  hearing  and 
misunderstandings.  Above  all,  they  were  frequently 
unable  to  follow  the  rapid  speech  of  the  Reformer. 
Under  these  circumstances  they  were  wont,  even  when 
the  conversation  had  been  in  German,  immediately  to 
translate  into  Latin  what  they  heard,  for  a  species  of 
shorthand  was  at  the  time  known  only  for  Latin. 

The  upshot  of  it  all  is  that  the  chief  witnesses  can- 
not be  accounted  absolutely  safe  authorities.  How- 
ever, though  we  must  constantly  apply  criticism  when 
using  them,  it  is  certain  by  this  time  that  they  have 
preserved  for  us  an  unusual  amount  of  valuable  infor- 
mation about  the  life,  deeds  and  views  of  Luther. 
They  offer  evidence  in  strict  chronological  sequence 
which  in  its  essentials  is  genuine,  and  indeed  brings 
the  true  Luther  if  not  closer,  at  any  rate  as  close  to  us 
as  his  own  letters  and  writings. 


LUTHER  AS  SCHOLAR  AND  AUTHOR  193 

If  we  join  the  Round  Table  in  the  Black  Cloister  in 
the  company  of  these  good  witnesses,  we  may  indeed 
sometimes  be  seized  with  the  feeling  of  having  blun- 
dered into  a  guard  room,  so  rude,  harsh,  cynical,  in  fact, 
coarse  seems  the  tone  of  the  conversation.  If  we  are 
not  deterred  thereby  from  further  investigation,  but 
follow  the  Doctor  also  into  his  study  and  quietly  watch 
him  while  he  is  at  work  writing  books,  our  astonish- 
ment is  perhaps  even  changed  into  mild  amazement. 
It  seems  that  the  old  man  waxes  cruder  in  proportion 
to  the  ease  with  which  he  is  able^  to  work.  He  writes 
against  the  Papacy  at  Rome,  founded  by  the  devil, 
in  a  strain  which  is  a  reproach  to  good  manners.  He 
composes  verses  to  go  with  satirical  pictures  against 
the  Papacy  which  to-day  would  certainly  cause  the 
police  to  make  him  an  object  of  their  paternal  solici- 
tude. 

If  thereupon  for  the  sake  of  recapitulation  we  page 
through  his  treatise  against  "Jack  Sausage  (Hans 
Wiirst,  i.  e.,  clown)  of  Brunswick,  we  perchance  be- 
gin to  feel  more  uncomfortable  still.  The  aged  Re- 
former employs  vulgar  expressions  so  frequently  and 
unconcernedly  that  it  makes  our  head  swim.  Besides, 
for  purposes  of  controversy,  he  keeps  a  whole  mena- 
gerie in  which  he  mercilessly  incarcerates  his  adversa- 
ries. He  delights  in  unexpectedly  transforming  them 
with  the  magic  wand  of  Circe  into  hogs,  donkeys, 
wolves,  bears,  he-goats,  dogs,  monkeys,  sheep,  oxen, 
cows,  etc.  Besides,  he  treats  them  quite  like  dumb  ani- 
mals. He  does  not  fight  them  like  a  gallant  author  of 
tlie  twentieth  century,  he  stabs  them  like  wild  boars. 


194  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

or  mauls  them  with  a  flail  like  an  uncouth  peasant, 
without  mercy  and  without  tiring.  In  short,  when 
his  ire  is  up  Luther  is,  as  it  seems,  a  "smut"  without 
equal.  But  he  behaves  thus  rudely  and  coarsely  not 
only  within  his  own  four  walls,  in  his  living  room  or 
study.  Even  in  the  pulpit  he  uses  very  rude  expres- 
sions and  figures  of  speech.  He  talks  very  "medici- 
nally," in  fact,  "medicynically,"  about  things  of  which 
everyone  knows  but  at  present  no  one  speaks  pubHcly. 

This  is  all  the  more  striking  when  we  note  the  sim- 
ple-hearted Mathesius  asserting  that  the  Doctor  never 
indulged  in  shameless  speech,  and  observe  the  well- 
known  Humanistic  historian  Sleidan,  describing  those 
obscene  pictures  by  Cranach  which  satirize  the  Pa- 
pacy so  calmly  and  cheerfully,  as  though  he  were 
dealing  merely  with  one  of  the  innocent  satires  on  pro- 
fessors in  the  Fliegende  Blaetter.  It  would  seem 
after  all  that  in  order  to  appreciate  this  tone  we  must 
again  take  to  heart  the  word  about  the  spirit  of  the 
times.  If  we  do  that,  if  we  transport  ourselves  three 
hundred  and  fifty  years  into  the  past,  we  will  soon 
clearly  see  that  the  tone  at  Luther's  table  and  in  his 
writings  is  not  at  all  at  variance  with  polite  manners 
in  German,  or  in  French,  English,  and  even  Italian 
society  of  the  day. 

The  well-known  adage:  "What  is  natural  is  not 
shameful,"  was  rarely  if  ever  followed  so  verbally  even 
by  persons  of  high  and  highest  rank  ( see,  for  instance, 
Pope  Julius  II)  as  in  these  rude  times.  People  evi- 
dently felt  that  what  everyone  knows,  everyone  may 
openly  discuss  with  anybody,  even  in  the  presence  of 


LUTHER  AS  SCHOLAR  AND  AUTHOR  195 

the  "delicate"  ladies.  This  latter  class  at  the  time  pos- 
sessed the  delicacy  of  the  Hamburg  fish-mongress  of 
to-day.  The  Hmnanist  Schem-l  upon  entering  the 
oiSce  of  Rector  at  the  university  ventured  an  address 
before  the  ladies  of  the  court  to  which  in  our  time  the 
coarsest  woman  would  not  listen  without  resentment. 
The  polished  and  pious  Queen  Margaret  of  Navarre 
wrote  novels  which  at  present  no  respectable  woman 
can  read  without  blushing.  And  the  virgin  Queen  of 
England  in  her  day  still  relished  immensely  Shake- 
speare's very  coarse  comedy,  The  Merry  Wives  of 
Windsor.  In  fact,  she  permitted  her  jacktars  to  hail 
her  with  a  not  exactly  incorrect  but  nevertheless  very 
impolite  greeting. 

As  for  the  men!  When  the  famous  preacher 
Geiler  of  Kaisersberg  compares  the  perfect  Chris- 
tian with  a  well-contrived  sausage,  when  he  praises 
Christ  as  our  sumpter  mule  who  bears  away  our  sins 
in  a  manure  bucket,  we  can,  if  need  be,  even  to-day 
stomach  such  comparisons.  But  the  nonchalance  with 
which  that  same  Geiler  and  other  noted  preachers  of 
the  time,  as,  for  example,  the  Westphalian  Gottschalk 
HoUen,  in  the  pulpit  discussed  intimacies  of  married 
life,  the  very  strange  jokes  and  anecdotes  with  which 
they  spiced  their  sermons,  after  all  strike  us  as  rather 
peculiar. 

And  yet,  these  preachers  seem  almost  prudes  to  the 
reader  if  thereupon  he  turns  to  the  so-called  poHte  let- 
ters of  the  sixteenth  century.  The  popular  books, 
the  miracle  plays,  the  satires  of  Thomas  Murner,  are 
not  merely  coarse  but  filthy,  the  Humanistic  belles- 


196  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

lettres  not  only  filthy  but  wanton.  If  we  remember 
this,  we  will  not  be  surprised  to  find  even  the  honorable 
Master  Diirer  inserting  such  extremely  coarse  jests 
in  his  letters  to  Pirckheimer,  nor  that  a  family  chroni- 
cle with  so  fundamentally  serious  a  purpose  as  theZim- 
mern  Chronicle  positively  swarms  with  indecent  anec- 
dotes, nor,  finally,  that  the  main  Latin  school  book  of 
the  day,  the  Familiar  Colloquies  of  Erasmus  of  Rot- 
terdam, is  tuned  to  this  same  pitch.  Even  the  pohte 
tone  of  the  sixteenth  century  was  therefore  in  our  esti- 
mation not  at  all  polite.  Uncleanly  as  the  people  in 
general  were  in  their  habits  of  eating  and  drinking — 
forks  and  handkerchiefs  had  not  yet  come  into  com- 
mon use — indulgent  as  they  were  toward  fleas,  lice 
and  other  vermin,  toward  the  itch  and  other  filthy  dis- 
eases, so  unclean  according  to  our  standards  they  still 
were  everywhere  in  their  literary  usages. 

From  a  generation  so  rude  and  coarse  Luther  had 
sprung,  to  such  a  generation  he  spoke,  and  against  it 
he  was  continually  forced  to  do  battle.  His  literacy 
antagonists — Prierias,  Alveld,  Eck,  Emser,  Coch- 
laeus,  Usingen,  Mensing,  Sylphius,  Conrad,  Koellin, 
Karlstadt,  Zwingli  and  whatever  else  their  names  may 
be — are  not  a  shade  more  delicate  than  he.  Indeed, 
some  of  them,  as,  for  instance,  Cochlaeus,  are  down- 
right filthy  and  frivolous,  while  he,  despite  all  coarse- 
ness, never  descends  to  frivolitj^ 

There  is,  besides,  another  factor  which  must  be 
taken  into  account  in  the  case  at  hand.  As  soon  as 
a  violent  fit  of  anger  rouses  Luther's  blood  the  humor- 
ous poet  in  him  begins  to  stir.    It  is  quite  impossible 


LUTHER  AS  SCHOLAR  AND  AUTHOR  197 

for  him  to  show  his  fists  to  his  opponent  without  con- 
tinually taunting  him  and  making  fun  of  him  in 
the  most  unrestrained  fashion.  At  such  moments 
Dr.  Emser,  whose  coat  of  arms  exhibits  a  he-goat,  di- 
rectly himself  becomes  Dr.  Billygoat,  the  very  learned 
Cochlaeus  (spooner)  suddenly  appears  as  Rotzloeffel 
(snotnose),  Dr.  Eck  becomes  Dr.  Geek  (dude)  or 
even Dreck  (dirt),  the  knight  Schwenckfeld  is  trans- 
formed into  Sir  Stenchfield,  Dr.  Usingen  becomes 
Dr.  Unsinn  (nonsense),  Dr.  Crotus  is  Dr.  Toad 
(Kroete),  the  Franciscan  Schatzgeier  appears  as 
Schatzfresser  (devourer  of  treasures),  while  his 
brother  in  the  order,  Alveld,  is  the  gray  miller's  beast 
which  always  brays  ika!  ika!  Duke  Henry  of  Braun- 
schweig-Wolfenbuettel  is  presented  as  Hans  Wiirst 
(clown),  as  a  sausage  devil,  as  a  cow  in  the  hickory 
tree,  as  a  pig  jingling  a  harp.  The  jurists  are  intro- 
duced as  Ignorists,  Knownothings,  Beamdoctors, 
since  they  cure  all  with  the  beam  of  the  gallows.  Fi- 
nally, the  book  of  Dr.  N.  is  presented  as  a  poodle, 
whose  hide  swarms  with  fleas,  to  wit,  not  errors  of 
print  but  errors  of  thought.  However,  the  Doctor 
was  particularly  fond  of  perennially  introducing 
*'Her  Serene  Highness,  the  White  Beast,"  the  hog. 
He  has  well  observed  how  the  dear  animal  wallows  in 
the  mud,  smacks  and  routs,  how  it  grunts  and  grum- 
bles, how  it  softly,  securely  and  tranquilly  snores  and 
upon  its  "bed  of  down"  lives  on  without  a  thought  of 
the  morrow,  how  through  its  snout  it  smiles  pleasantly 
at  its  litter  of  grunters.  For  controversial  ends,  how- 
ever, Luther  seems  sometimes  almost  to  have  trained 


198  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

the  beast.  It  appears  as  a  clown,  at  times  with  a 
lemon  in  its  mouth,  sometimes  with  a  necklace  of 
pearls,  once  in  armor,  then  again  with  a  spinning- 
wheel  or  a  harp. 

No  person,  therefore,  who  lacks  a  feeling  for  the 
humor  of  the  sixteenth  century  can  comprehend  Lu- 
ther as  a  contraversialist.  This  humor  was  not  deli- 
cate. Luther  frequently  enough  turns  it  very  rudely 
against  his  own  person.  He  refers  to  it  repeatedly  as 
"the  fat  Doctor,"  the  "rotten,  stinking  wormbag,"  the 
"bundle  of  diseased  flesh."  But  despite  all  such  wild 
somersaults  he  never  becomes  indecent  as  Emser, 
Cochlaeus  and  Lemnius,  for  instance.  Indeed,  he 
may  well  be  cited  as  a  good  proof  of  the  fact  that  a 
German  may  be  rude  and  crude  to  the  point  of  coarse- 
ness without  ever  becoming  obscene  and  frivolous. 

On  the  other  hand,  did  not  Luther  on  one  occasion 
request  a  melancholiac  to  cheer  himself  up  with 
smutty  jokes?  Does  he  not  on  the  twenty-third 
of  May,  1534,  write  to  Joachim  of  Anhalt:  "Joy  in 
the  company  of  good  pious  people,  in  the  fear  of  God 
and  in  all  decency  and  honor,  though  there  be  a  word 
or  jest  (Zotlein)  too  many,  is  pleasing  to  God."  In- 
deed, this  is  the  literal  reading  of  the  letter.  But  the 
very  context  permits  the  surmise  that  "Zotlein"  here 
is  not  equivalent  to  our  modern  "Zote,"  i.  e.,  smutty 
jest.  If  for  purpose  of  information  we  open  a  German 
dictionary,  for  instance,  the  well-known  work  by 
Daniel  Sanders,  we  not  only  see  this  surmise  amply 
confirmed,  but  find  also  a  whole  list  of  proof  pas- 
sages showing  that  the  term  was  used  by  Luther  in 


LUTHER  AS  SCHOLAR  AND  AUTHOR         199 

the  sense  of  joke,  anecdote,  droll  story,  idle  excuse. 
This  single  experience  teaches  us  that  we  must  oper- 
ate carefully  with  citations  from  Luther.  His  Ger- 
man must  always  first  be  translated  into  the  German 
of  our  day.  For  not  only  the  meaning,  also  the  timbre 
of  words  has  materially  changed  in  the  course  of  time. 
Certain  vulgar  terms  were  in  the  sixteenth  century 
not  regarded  as  indelicate  and  expressions  like,  you 
ass,  you  donkey,  were  not  regarded  as  serious  insults 
even  by  polite  society.  Luther,  for  instance,  calmly 
publishes  the  words  "I  am  a  sheep  and  will  remain 
a  sheep,"  "I  am  a  goose  as  compared  to  the  cardinal, 
and  a  miserable  sheep  over  against  the  jurists";  while 
he  praises  his  Elector,  the  corpulent  John  Frederick, 
before  the  whole  company  at  dinner,  by  saying:  "He 
works  like  a  mule." 

However,  even  after  we  have  become  quite  accus- 
tomed to  the  hterary  taste  and  habit  of  the  sixteenth 
century  and  make  due  allowance  for  the  humor  of  Lu- 
ther, we  can,  nevertheless,  not  suppress  an  occasional 
feeling  of  astonishment  over  the  tone  of  his  polemics. 
And  this  sensation  is  not  merely  the  result  of  modern 
prudishness.  We  meet  it  here  and  there  also  with 
Luther's  contemporaries  Not  alone  Melanchthon 
who  was  not  altogether  free  from  the  squeamishness 
of  the  closet  scholar,  but  also  Catharine  von  Bora,  who 
certainly  cannot  be  accused  of  being  too  finical,  some- 
times thought  the  Doctor  too  crude. 

Much  more  frequently  we  hear  friend  and  foe  com- 
plaining about  his  ungovernable  violence.  Mosellan 
emphasizes  this  trait  as  early  as  1519  in  an  otherwise 


200  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

very  kindly  report  on  the  Disputation  at  Leipzig. 
Spalatin  is,  since  the  beginning  of  1520,  again  and 
again  commissioned  by  the  old  Elector  to  take  Luther 
to  task  for  this,  and  Wenzel  Link  in  August,  1520, 
induces  the  Reformer  to  confess  personally  that  "al- 
most everybody  criticizes  my  mordacity."  This  shows 
that  he  was  conscious  of  this  failing.  He  at  times  com- 
plains about  his  vehement  nature  and  his  biting  style. 
In  fact,  he  even  went  so  far  as  to  openly  confess 
before  the  Emperor  and  the  assembled  Estates  at 
Worms  that  in  his  writings  against  private  persons  he 
had  been  more  violent  than  was  proper.  However, 
this  self-knowledge  did  little  good.  In  spite  of  all, 
Luther  ever  remained  a  typical  choleric.  In  fact,  in 
the  tremendous  excitement  and  tension  of  the  endless 
struggle;  he  finally  even  felt  a  good  violent  fit  of  anger 
as  a  beneficial  relief.  "Then  my  blood  is  refreshed, 
my  intellect  becomes  clear  and  sharp  and  temptations 
leave  me,"  he  once  confessed. 

Every  highly  temperamental  person  will  be  able 
to  sympathize  with  Luther  on  this  point.  However, 
in  this  characteristic  after  all  lurked  an  element  of 
danger.  Every  such  period  of  excitement  immedi- 
ately engendered  an  extraordinary  desire  for  work 
and  conflict.  As  though  he  were  rejuvenated  even 
the  aged  Luther  would,  while  still  fired  by  fresh  re- 
sentment, pick  up  his  pen  in  order  to  work  off  the 
anger  of  his  heart  in  one  sitting.  Besides,  he  mostly 
did  not  await  a  more  tranquil  moment  and  once  more 
calmly  revise  what  he  had  written,  but  as  soon  as  he 
began  writing  he  also  commenced  printing,  so  that 


LUTHER  AS  SCHOLAR  AND  AUTHOR         201 

the  new  book  was  in  most  cases  pretty  nearly  ready 
by  the  time  he  had  written  the  last  letter  and  drained 
to  the  dregs  the  cup  of  his  wholesome  anger. 

This  peculiar  method  of  work  to  a  considerable  de- 
gree explains  the  incomparable  freshness  and  the 
ravishing  temperament  with  which  the  Reformer, 
even  in  the  products  of  his  last  years  full  of  suffering, 
astonishes  the  reader.  On  the  other  hand,  it  is  re- 
sponsible also  for  the  exceeding  violence  of  his  po- 
lemics. Sentiments  and  opinions  which  a  more  even- 
tempered  writer  at  once  suppresses  Luther  instantly 
permits  to  gush  forth  without  consideration  or  fore- 
thought. To  be  sure,  he  mostly  also  gives  free  rein  to 
his  sparkling  wit,  and  plays  with  his  adversary  in  a 
bearish  humor  like  a  wild  and  bellicose  giant  of  the  old 
sagas,  while  at  the  same  time  he  is  dealing  out  blows 
right  and  left  with  his  peasant  ax  like  a  rude  wood- 
cutter. At  other  times,  however,  even  he  sees  blood, 
and  words  of  fiery  hatred  crowd  to  his  lips.  "If  the 
fury  of  the  Romanists  continues  in  this  wise,"  he 
writes  at  the  end  of  May,  1520 — though  in  Latin 
and  in  a  hasty  preface  to  the  epitome  by  Prierias — 
"nothing  will  remain  but  that  the  Emperor,  the 
kings  and  princes  attack  the  pest  by  force  of  arms. 
...  If  thieves  are  punished  with  the  gallows,  rob- 
bers with  the  sword  and  heretics  with  fire,  why  do  we 
not  with  all  our  weapons  assail  these  cardinals,  popes 
and  the  whole  Roman  Sodom  and  wash  our  hands  in 
their  blood"  ?  More  savage  still,  perhaps,  are  the  pic- 
tures in  which  he  revels  in  the  last  treatise  about  the 
Papacy,  and  in  the  verses  accompanying  the  satirical 


202    LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

woodcuts  of  Cranach  of  1545.  These  latter,  by  the 
way,  he  himself  regarded  as  too  coarse.  In  them  he 
quite  outdoes  himself  like  a  blustering  lansquenet  in 
grotesque  fancies  and  comparisons  about  His  Hell- 
ishness,  St.  Paul  the  Third,  the  little  daughter 
Pauline,  the  saintly  virgin  Paula  and  the  "Epicurean 
Hogs,"  the  cardinals. 

Naturally  one  is  not  justified  in  interpreting  into 
this  reveling  in  forcible  expressions  and  grewsome 
images  which  follow  and  neutralize  one  another  any 
specific  threats,  as  little  as  we  directly  take  the  scold- 
ing of  an  angry  person  as  a  menace.  It  must  also  not 
be  forgotten  that  an  access  of  rage  like  this,  which 
spends  itself  at  the  writing  desk,  but  never  permits 
itself  to  be  carried  away  to  corresponding  deeds  must 
not  be  placed  on  a  par  with  the  cold-blooded  hatred 
which  slowly  torments  its  victim  to  death. 

In  spite  of  all,  however,  this  hatred  was  genuine 
and  honest,  just  as  real  as  the  delicate  affection, 
friendliness  and  paternal  mildness  which  the  power- 
ful man  otherwise  exhibited  toward  so  many  worthy 
and  unworthy  persons.  For  it  was,  in  the  last  analy- 
sis, rooted  in  the  notion  derived  from  personal  impres- 
sions and  the  reports  of  other  pilgrims  to  Rome  that 
the  Roman  Curia  was  the  breeding  place  of  the  most 
criminal  vices  and  of  complete  atheism,  and  that  it 
was  at  the  same  time  an  organized  robber  band  against 
which  one  ought  to  proceed  with  the  same  regard- 
lessness  as  against  the  robbers,  murderers,  whores, 
adulterers  and  Sodomites  in  one's  own  country.  This 
must  always  be  kept  in  mind  in  the  presence  of  these 


LUTHER  AS  SCHOLAR  AND  AUTHOR  203 

outbreaks  of  titanic  anger,  for  otherwise  it  is  impos- 
sible to  appreciate  the  feelings  of  the  old  man  in  such 
moments,  or  one  will  even  consider  the  continual 
storming  against  the  Pope  as  merely  the  product  of  a 
childish  partisan  hatred. 

It  is  a  well-recognized  fact  that  persons  of  such  co- 
lossal temperament  are  never  capable  of  judging  their 
opponents  coolly,  objectively  and  justly.  But  it  is 
contrary  to  all  experience  that  in  the  case  of  Luther, 
passionateness  should  continually  increase  with  his 
years,  so  that  his  last  polemics  are  also  his  rudest  and 
most  wrathful.  As  a  rule,  the  vehemence  of  youth 
subsides  with  advancing  age  in  such  a  marked  degree 
that  the  effervescent  youth  can  hardly  be  recognized 
again  in  the  quiet,  mild  and  clarified  old  man.  The 
aged  Luther,  therefore,  in  this  respect  presents  a 
psychological  problem  which  calls  for  an  explanation. 
This  might  perhaps  in  the  first  place  be  found  in  the 
fact  that  from  the  end  of  1517  to  his  death  the  Re- 
former stood  in  the  midst  of  one  of  the  most  bitter, 
spiteful  and  personal  conflicts  known  to  the  history 
of  the  world,  a  controversy  in  which  the  honor  of  his 
wife,  his  children,  his  parents,  his  friends  and  his  ruler 
were  as  little  spared  as  his  own  person.  Such  cease- 
less warfare  to  the  knife  makes  the  tenderest  soul 
hard,  irritable,  rude  and  even  coarse. 

In  this  instance,  however,  where  we  have  to  deal 
with  a  robust  fighter  a  much  more  trivial  explanation 
has  greater  probability.  From  his  fortieth  year  on 
Luther  was  a  sick  man.  After  having  suffered  for 
six  months  from  severe  digestive  ailments,  as  early  as 


204  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

1521,  he  two  years  later  became  the  victim  of  nervous 
headaches  which  never  again  left  him.  In  1526  he 
developed  a  serious  attack  of  renal  colic  with  all  man- 
ner of  complications,  rheumatic  fevers,  sciatica  and 
furuncles.  In  addition  he  frequently  suffered  from 
obstinate  catarrhal  and  digestive  disturbances,  tem- 
porarily also  from  haemorrhoids  (1525),  dysentery 
(1536),  middle  ear  disease  (1537),  which  robbed  him 
of  hearing  and  sleep  for  weeks,  with  toothache  and 
frightful  nervous  pains  in  the  chest  (precordial 
pains). 

Already,  in  1530,  Luther  presents  the  typical  pic- 
ture of  a  "completely  nervous,  prematurely  aged  man" 
who  despite  ever  more  frequent  and  longer  periods 
of  rest  nevertheless  continually  subjects  himself  to 
new  hardships  and  excitement  and  thus  makes  him- 
self always  more  ill.  It  consequently  seems  almost 
a  miracle  that  he  was  able  to  keep  himself  up  tolerably 
well  for  fifteen  years  more  until  he  succumbed  to  a 
stroke  of  paralysis  on  the  eighteenth  of  February, 
1546.  Evidently  "God  gave  to  him,"  as  to  his  father, 
"a  firm  and  enduring  body,"  otherwise  he  would  cer- 
tainly have  broken  down  earlier.  His  increasing  illness 
fully  explains  the  growing  irritability,  violence  and  ill- 
humor  of  the  Reformer.  However,  it  also  shows  how 
advisable  it  is  to  first  hear  the  opinion  of  a  medical 
expert  before  passing  judgment  on  an  accused  person, 
even  though  that  person  has  long  been  resting  in  the 
grave. 


CHAPTER  VIL 

Personal  Habits  and  Character  of  the  Reformer, 

TITE  have  just  seen  that  during  the  larger  portion 
^^  of  his  public  life  Luther  was  a  sick  man,  and 
that  a  fair  estimate  of  his  person  and  character  is  im- 
possible unless  the  verdict  of  medical  experts  be  taken 
into  account.  Had  this  always  been  done,  the  current 
talk  about  the  glutton  and  toper,  Luther,  would  also 
have  finally  ceased.  It  is  well-known  that  even 
Goethe  scoffs:  "Acquiring  a  paunch  by  fasting,  like 
unto  Doctor  Luther."  Is  there  good  cause  for  such 
mockery?  At  the  time  of  the  Leipzig  Disputation 
the  Reformer  was  still  so  lean  that  every  bone  in  his 
body  could  be  numbered.  After  returning  from  the 
Wartburg,  however,  he  already  showed  a  "befitting 
plumpness,"  and  he  gained  somewhat  more  in  weight 
after  his  marriage  to  Catharine  von  Bora.  Therefore 
his  "paunch"  is  an  incontrovertible  historical  fact. 
But  this  late  acquisition  was  in  his  case  as  little  a  re- 
sult of  overindulgence  as  with  most  of  the  poor  elderly 
men  who  are  at  present  seen  thus  afflicted.  It  is 
merely  the  result  of  an  anomalous  metabolism  brought 
on  by  a  uric-acid  diathesis,  for  it  is  an  established  fact 
that  Luther  was  in  no  way  a  gormandizer.  Though 
in  the  letters  to  his  spouse  and  to  his  friends  he  oc- 
casionally praises  facetiously  the  splendid  hospitality 
of  the  princes  and  great  men,  he  himself  preferred 
205 


206  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

"a  wholesome,  common  home  diet"  to  all  delicacies. 
Even  game  was  for  him  too  "melancholy"  in  its  effect. 
However,  even  this  ordinary  home  diet  was  by  no 
means  always  partaken  of  plentifully.  At  times  Lu- 
ther would  for  extended  periods  content  himself  with 
a  herring  and  a  little  bread  for  an  entire  day.  In 
fact,  once,  while  in  good  health,  he  touched  no  food  at 
all  for  four  whole  days.  Melanchthon,  who  during 
almost  twenty-eight  years  as  neighbor  and  colleague 
was  in  intimate  intercourse  with  him,  therefore,  often 
marveled  how  little  meat  and  drink  Luther  required 
in  spite  of  his  ample  physique. 

However,  even  though  the  Reformer  was  no  gas- 
tronomist and  "glutton,"  did  he  not  indulge  more 
than  necessary  in  drink?  Was  he  not  an  ever-thirsty 
"hop-brother,  wine-barrel,  drunkard,"  or,  to  use  the 
milder  terms  of  the  present,  an  alcoholic  and  habitual 
drinker  of  the  most  doubtful  sort?  One  who  knows 
the  people  of  the  sixteenth  century  will  indeed  be 
easily  tempted  to  apply  to  him  all  these  honorary 
designations,  for  at  no  time,  perhaps,  was  hard  drink- 
ing so  much  in  vogue  in  Germany  than  in  these  days. 
Charles  the  Fifth  was  not  exactly  regarded  as  a  tip- 
pler for  he  took  only  "three  draughts"  with  his  meals. 
But  with  every  one  of  these  he  emptied,  without  draw- 
ing a  breath,  a  crystal  beaker  containing  probably  one 
and  one-half  pints,  that  is,  about  a  bottle  of  wine. 
The  beautiful  Philippina  Welser  was  famous  for  her 
delicate  complexion,  but,  nevertheless,  she  was  able 
at  Castle  Amras  to  drain  the  "Welcome,"  a  goblet 
holding  two  full  liters  of  wine.    On  the  basis  of  these 


PERSONAL  HABITS  AND  CHARACTER  207 

instances  one  can  approximately  compute  the  quan- 
tity of  wine  which  notorious  alcoholics  hke  the 
Elector  John  Frederick  of  Saxony,  or  the  Dukes 
William  IV  and  Albrecht  V  of  Bavaria,  were  ca- 
pable of  consuming.  The  bad  habit  of  heating  the 
mouth  with  pepper,  generally  the  excessive  use  of 
pepper,  cloves  and  sharp  spices,  as  well  as  the  im- 
moderate eating  of  meat,  certainly  increased  con- 
siderably this  astonishing  craving  for  drink.  But 
it  would  scarcely  have  assumed  such  dimensions  had 
not,  since  1520,  excessive  drinking  become  practically 
a  sport,  and  drunkenness  through  ridiculously  pedan- 
tic drinking  regulations  quite  the  fashion  in  high  so- 
ciety. These  facts  also  enable  us  to  comprehend  why 
the  contemporary  verdict  on  this  vice  was  so  very 
lenient.  To  us  it  seems  an  unheard  of  thing  that  the 
Protestant  Mathesius  and  the  Catholic  Eck,  while  in 
the  pulpit  they  energetically  combat  intoxication, 
should  nevertheless  find  an  "honest  drunk"  excusable. 
Their  hearers  were  undoubtedly  not  offended  by  this 
attitude,  indeed,  very  probably  they  even  regarded 
such  preachers  as  apostles  of  temperance. 

Luther  in  speech  and  writing  fought  drunkenness 
more  vehemently  than  any  German  of  that  day.  He 
privately  and  publicly  spoke  his  mind  on  this  point 
also  to  princes  and  even  censured  his  own  Elector 
openly  on  this  account,  while  he  very  drastically  re- 
buked the  members  of  the  electoral  court  for  the  same 
reason.  Nevertheless,  he  also  judges  a  "good  drunk" 
very  mildly.  He  believed  that  people  who  grew  vio- 
lent and  vicious  from  the  effects  of  alcohol  ought  by 


208  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

all  means  to  avoid  drink  like  poison,  but,  on  the  other 
hand,  he  held  that  men  who  are  engaged  in  dangerous 
work  all  week,  as,  for  example,  the  miners,  ought  not 
to  be  judged  harshly  if  on  Sunday  they  permitted 
themselves  a  goodly  quantity  of  liquor.  Courtiers 
also  ought  not  to  be  grudged  a  "drunk"  after  hard 
physical  exertions,  though  he  says  that  by  no  means 
must  it  be  tolerated  that  they  appear  every  morning 
as  though  their  heads  had  been  pickled  in  brine.  This 
indulgent  attitude  will  scarcely  meet  with  approba- 
tion to-day.  But  in  the  sixteenth  century  even  such  a 
differentiation  was  looked  upon  as  narrow-minded- 
ness, pedantry  and  philistinism. 

Theory  in  such  manners  is  almost  always  the  result 
of  personal  practice.  Therefore,  the  question  arises : 
Did  Luther  himself  at  times  allow  himself  a  "good 
drunk"  like  his  father,  the  old  Hans  Luther?  Indeed, 
was  the  Reformer  not  perhaps  a  regular  toper?  It 
seems  advisable  that  we  first  consult  the  physician  also 
on  this  point.  Medical  experts  teach  us  that  alco- 
holics are  wholly  incapable  of  any  fatiguing  and  con- 
tinuous mental  work.  How  about  Luther  in  this  re- 
gard? Let  us  pick  out  at  random  the  one  or  the  other 
year  from  the  various  periods  of  his  life  in  order  to 
determine  exactly  his  working  capacity.  The  year 
1521  may  be  considered  first,  for  it  is  in  that  year  that, 
according  to  Father  Denifle,  he  began  drinking.  In 
spite  of  this  he  wrote  twenty  larger  or  smaller  trea- 
tises in  that  period,  which  in  the  Weimar  edition  fill 
985  pages.  In  addition  he  translated  a  book  by  Me- 
lanchthon  into  German,  and  began  the  translation  of 


PERSONAL  HABITS  AND  CHARACTER  209 

the  New  Testament  and  the  composition  of  his  postil, 
besides  writing  a  great  number  of  letters,  of  which 
seventy-two  are  still  available.  And  yet,  he  was  in 
this  eventful  year  forced  to  be  idle  for  five  weeks  ow- 
ing to  travel  and  on  many  days  was  sorely  hindered 
by  illness.  In  1523  the  first  attacks  of  the  above- 
mentioned  headaches  began  to  impair  his  well-being; 
also  he  traveled  about  two  weeks.  Nevertheless,  in 
this  twelvemonth  he  wrote  twenty-four  treatises  of 
varying  size,  preached  one  hundred  and  fifty  sermons, 
gave  a  course  of  lectures  on  Deuteronomy  which  takes 
up  two  hundred  and  forty-seven  pages  in  the  Weimar 
edition,  completed  the  German  version  of  the  Penta- 
teuch and  began  the  translation  of  the  remainder  of 
the  Old  Testament.  Besides  this,  we  still  possess  one 
hundred  and  twelve  letters  of  this  year — "of  course 
only  a  fraction  of  his  correspondence."  During  the 
five  and  one-half  months  he  spent  at  the  Koburg  in 
1530  (April  25  to  October  4),  "he  was  so  sick  in  his 
head"  that,  as  he  himself  says,  he  had  to  rest  and  re- 
main idle.  Despite  this  fact  he  in  this  interval  com- 
pleted twelve  works  of  varying  size,  finished  the  trans- 
lation of  Jeremiah,  partially  translated  Ezekiel  and 
all  the  lesser  prophets,  edited  a  number  of  ^ sop's 
Fables  in  German,  and  furthermore,  wrote  quite  a 
series  of  opinions  and  letters,  some  of  which  were  of 
considerable  length  and  of  which  one  hundred  and 
twenty-three  are  still  preserved.  Finally,  we  still 
have  the  year  1545,  of  which  he  spent  two  months  in 
travel,  and  when  he  was  already  completely  exhausted, 
broken  and  tired  of  life,  a  number  of  long  treatises 


210  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

and  a  few  short  ones,  also  the  concluding  lectures  on 
Genesis  and  more  than  sixty  letters  and  arbitraments. 

All  told  Luther  published  about  three  hundred  and 
fifty  treatises,  among  them,  it  is  true,  a  series  of  trans- 
lations and  a  great  number  of  pamphlets.  In  literary 
productivity  at  best  the  Jesuit  Gretscher  (two  hun- 
dred and  sixty-eight  treatises),  Augustine  (two  hun- 
dred and  thirty-two)  and  Origen  can  vie  with  him. 
And  this  fertility  is  with  Luther  not  merely  quanti- 
tative, as  in  the  case  of  Gretscher.  The  Reformer  ap- 
pears almost  inexhaustible  in  expressions  as  well  as  in 
ideas.  He  certainly  is  the  first  great  German  man  of 
letters,  and  at  the  same  time  among  the  writers  of  all 
ages  one  of  the  richest  in  form  and  thought.  These 
observations  for  the  medical  expert  do  away  with  the 
"alcoholic"  Luther.  A  drunkard  would,  alone  from 
the  point  of  view  of  physical  endurance,  not  have  been 
equal  to  such  a  tremendous  burden  of  work,  much  less 
would  he  have  been  able  to  bear  the  excitement  of  the 
colossal  battles  which  the  Reformer  had  to  fight. 

Of  course,  this  does  not  exclude  the  possibility  that 
the  great  fighter  occasionally  indulged  in  a  "good 
drunk."  We  may  say  that  whole  generations  of  in- 
vestigators and  inquisitors  have  been  at  pains  to  col- 
lect evidence  to  substantiate  this  charge.  Their  great 
labors  have,  however,  so  far  been  futile,  for  all  their 
proofs  have  later  been  shown  to  be  invalid.  If  Lu- 
ther, for  instance,  writes:  "I  am  now  not  drunk  nor 
indiscreet,"  this  is  only  a  forcible  mode  of  assertion, 
for  in  the  same  sense  he  wi'ites :  Christ  was  not  drunk 
when  he  spoke  the  sacramental  words  of  the  Holy 


PERSONAL  HABITS  AND  CHARACTER  211 

Eucharist,  God  is  not  drunk,  the  Evangelists  are  not 
drunk.  When  Wolfgang  Musculus,  in  1536,  at  the 
time  of  the  Wittenberg  Concord  reports :  On  May  the 
twenty-first  we  accompanied  Luther  home  after  the 
meal,  he  was  wonderfully  hilarious  {mire  hilaris), 
.  .  .  during  the  evening  potion  in  his  home  he  again 
was  wonderfully  hilarious  and  very  amiable,  and  when 
just  prior  he  says  of  Melanchthon:  Wonderfully  ex- 
hilarated he  discussed  astrology  at  the  table,  this  all 
does  not  prove  that  the  two  Reformers  were  intoxi- 
cated but  merely  that  they  were  cheerful.  For 
"hilaiis"  in  this  connection  signifies  only  cheerful 
happy  and  not  hilarious.  When  in  March,  1523,  Lu- 
ther at  Schweinitz  vomited  before  the  meal,  this  does 
not  prove  that  during  the  meal  he  had  become  intoxi- 
cated from  Grueneberger  wine,  but  that  at  the  time  he 
suffered  from  digestive  derangement.  And  if  in  this 
period  the  vomiting  recurred  daily  it  does  not  show 
that  Luther  every  day  drank  until  he  became  nau- 
seated but  merely  that  he  was  ill. 

However,  did  not  Luther  once  sign  a  letter  with  the 
significant  words;  Doctor  plenus?  (the  "full"  Doc- 
tor). Fortunately  the  missive  has  been  preserved  in 
the  original.  The  word  we  find  is  naturally  not 
"plenus"  but  "Johannes,"  the  name  of  little  Hans 
Luther,  who  is  sending  greetings  to  his  sponsor.  The 
situation  is  the  same  in  the  famous  confession  in  the 
letter  of  the  second  of  July,  1540,  to  his  "Gracious 
Lady  of  Zuelsdorf  at  the  New  Hog  Market,"  in  which 
he  says:  "I  am  guttling  like  a  Bohemian  and  toping 
like  a  German,  thanks  be  to  God,  Amen."    The  tone 


212  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

of  the  whole  document,  and  one  must,  of  course,  read 
it  in  full,  shows  that  we  have  here  a  playful  exaggera- 
tion. This  is,  besides,  proven  abundantly  from  a  simi- 
lar letter  of  the  sixteenth  of  July  to  the  same  address. 
The  message  is  also  extant  in  the  original  and  we  read 
there:  "Thank  God  we  are  here  cheerful  and  well, 
glutting  like  Bohemians,  though  not  very — and  guz- 
zhng  like  Germans,  though  not  much,  but  we  are 
happy." 

So  these  proofs,  also,  lead  us  nowhere.  There  re- 
mains the  "notorious  verse":  ''Who  loves  7iot  wine, 
woman  and  song,  remains  a  fool  his  whole  life  long/' 
This  is,  indeed,  perhaps  the  most  frequently  cited  ut- 
terance of  Luther.  However,  it  is  not  by  Luther  but 
very  probably  originated  with  Johann  Heinrich  Voss. 
The  latter  first  published  it  in  1777  in  theWandsbecker 
Bote,  and  when  pressed  for  the  exact  source  of  his 
citation  was  not  able  to  give  it.  It  is  possible  that  he 
merely  translated  a  rhymed  Itahan  saying:  "Who 
loves  not  wine,  women  and  song  {canto)  is  either  a 
fool  or  a  saint  (santo)/'  and  as  a  sworn  adherent  of 
Enlightenment  suppressed  the  saint.  It  may  also  be 
that  he  made  use  of  one  of  the  Table  Talks  of  Luther 
which,  however,  was  meant  in  quite  another  way.  It 
runs:  "One  must  bear  with  the  weaknesses  of  every 
country:  The  Bohemians  gluttonize,  the  Wends  steal, 
the  Germans  drink  immoderately.  For  how  would 
you  now  excel  a  German,  except  it  be  in  drinking,  es- 
pecially one  who  does  not  love  music  and  women?" 
These  "proofs,"  therefore,  all  of  them  do  not  bear  up 
under  criticism,  and  others  which  are  adduced  besides 


PERSONAL  HABITS  AND  CHARACTER  213 

have  about  the  same  value,  as,  for  instance,  the  evi- 
dence about  the  supposed  illegitimate  son  of  Luther, 
Andrew,  who  in  reality  was  his  nephew. 

Luther  never  says  that  he  had  been  intoxicated,  and 
no  one  ever  saw  him  drunk,  otherwise  we  would 
surely  know  about  it,  for  if  ever  a  man  lived  in  a  glass- 
house it  was  Luther.  This  again  naturally  does  not 
prove  that  the  Reformer  was  an  anti-alcoholic.  In 
fact,  Luther,  as  an  advocate  of  prohibition  would  be 
as  much  an  unhistorical  fantasy  as  Luther  the 
drunkard.  When  in  August,  1540,  he  says:  "I  drink 
also,  but  not  every  person  ought  to  try  and  imitate 
me,"  when  he  says  that  God  ought  to  give  him  credit 
for  occasionally  taking  a  good  draught  in  his  honor, 
and  when  he  writes  to  a  melancholiac :  "I  frequently 
drink  more  copiously  in  order  to  vex  the  devil,"  this 
all  proves  sufficiently  that  Luther  was  by  no  means 
averse  to  a  good  drink.  Without  doubt  he  was  very 
fond  of  good  wine,  either  the  Jueterbock,  Grueneberg, 
Franconian,  Rhenish  or  Rinvoglio  vintage.  Fur- 
thermore, he  liked  Torgau  and  Naumburg  beer  very 
much  though  he  was  given  this  pleasure  very  rarely, 
ordinarily  he  had  to  be  satisfied  with  the  murky  and 
not  very  excellent  home  brew  of  his  severe  spouse. 

However,  there  were  times  when  in  the  Black  Clois- 
ter there  was  a  dearth  not  only  of  beer  but  also  of 
money.  Under  those  circumstances  the  Reformer 
was,  willy-nilly,  forced  to  forego  his  accustomed  bev- 
erage for  f ort)^  days  or  more.  And  it  really  seems  as 
though  this  privation  was  not  an  easy  matter  for  him. 
For  Luther  valued  beer  in  the  first  place  as  a  diuretic. 


214  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

secondly,  as  a  remedy  for  his  bad  digestion — ^he  made 
medical  observations  about  it  at  times — and  finally, 
as  a  narcotic.  In  his  last  years  he  suffered  greatly 
from  insomnia  so  that  "he  had  to  seek  his  pillow  and 
bolster  in  the  tankard."  This  explains  why  some  par- 
ticularly conscientious  investigators  assiduously  en- 
deavored to  determine  the  amount  of  alcohol  he  im- 
bibed daily,  and  the  maximum  quantity  which  he  on 
special  occasions  was  capable  of  consuming.  How- 
ever, all  such  investigations  and  computations  have  so 
far  brought  no  results.  This  problem  of  research  on 
Luther  will  hence  perhaps  always  remain  unsolved 
and  will  vex  many  an  inquisitor  in  much  the  same 
manner  as  the  devil  vexed  Doctor  Luther. 

Luther  the  drunkard  and  toper,  therefore,  never 
existed,  and  no  one  ever  saw  him  intoxicated.  Of  all 
these  accusations  only  the  one  fact  remains  that  Lu- 
ther regularly  drank  his  beer  and  was  fond  of  good 
wine,  that  on  special  occasions  he  loved  to  have  a  good 
drink,  and  that  in  his  age  he  was  wont  to  combat  in- 
somnia by  taking  "a  more  copious  draught"  in  the 
evening.  We  may  fittingly  doubt,  however,  that  this 
by  no  means  overdue  indulgence  in  alcoholic  bever- 
ages was  always  good  for  his  health.  According  to 
present-day  opinion,  at  least,  only  the  alcohol  which 
they  do  not  drink  is  beneficial  to  people  who  are  nerv- 
ous and  suffer  from  the  stone.  But  the  medical  art 
of  the  sixteenth  century  was  still  in  the  stage  of  com- 
plete scientific  innocence.  It  had  not  the  least  notion 
as  yet  of  the  harmful  effects  of  this  poison.  There- 
fore, it  also  did  not  make  the  slightest  effort  to  curb 


PERSONAL  HABITS  AND  CHARACTER  215 

the  use  and  abuse  of  spirituous  beverages.  On  the 
contrary,  it  advised  copious  drinking,  without  dis- 
tinction as  to  materials  as  a  remedy  for  the  stone. 

Intemperance  is,  as  a  rule,  combined  with  unbridled 
sexual  passion.  This  observation  again  is  confirmed  by 
the  Germans  of  the  fifteenth  and  sixteenth  centuries. 
Adultery  was  at  the  time  so  common  in  Germany  and 
was  judged  so  leniently  that  even  at  Luther's  table  a 
companion  dared  to  broach  the  question,  whether  for- 
nicatio  simplex  were  a  sin  at  all.  Venereal  disease  was 
for  that  very  reason  not  held  to  be  a  stigma,  but  was 
looked  upon  as  a  thoroughly  respectable  ailment,  in- 
deed, as  the  disease  of  prominent  people.  Popes  and 
kings,  princes,  cardinals  and  bishops  were  thus  af- 
flicted without  feeling  ashamed.  Humanistic  literati 
unhesitatingly  called  upon  the  protection  of  the  Vir- 
gin Mary  against  the  danger  of  infection.  In  fact, 
Hutten  unconcernedly  dedicated  his  treatise  on  the 
symptoms  and  the  cure  of  the  disease  to  the  Cardinal 
Archbishop  Albrecht  of  Mayence ;  while  the  physician 
Fracastaro  inscribed  his  famous  poem  of  like  content 
to  the  papal  prelate  Bembo,  and  neither  of  the  two 
high  church  officials  made  any  objections. 

It  is  generally  known  how  much  the  priests,  monks 
and  nuns  contributed  to  this  corruption.  The  fact 
that  Luther  came  up  from  monastic  ranks  is  there- 
fore in  itself  no  proof  at  all  for  his  moral  integrity. 
But  it  is  also  not  permissible  to  reckon  him  among  the 
great  number  of  black  sheep  without  documentary 
evidence.  And  Father  Denifle  does  not  make  this 
mistake.    He  believes  himself  in  possession  of  a  suffi- 


216  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

cient  number  of  proofs  for  the  contention  that  Luther 
was  a  wanton  and  at  the  same  time  a  "urist,"  that  is, 
a  person  chronically  afflicted  with  lust. 

One  of  these  confirmatory  documents  is  the  letter  of 
Luther  to  Spalatin  written  on  the  sixteenth  of  April, 
1525.  In  it  he  says:  "As  for  your  remarks  about  my 
marriage,  do  not  be  surprised  that  I  do  not  marry, 
seeing  that  I  am  such  an  exceedingly  skilful  lover.  It 
is  still  more  remarkable  that  I  who  write  so  much  con- 
cerning marriage  and  in  this  way  have  so  much  to  do 
with  woman  {sic  misceor  feminis)  have  not  become 
a  woman  long  since,  not  to  mention  the  fact  that  I 
have  not  married  a  long  time  ago.  Still,  if  you  want 
my  example,  you  have  the  very  best  reason.  For  I 
have  had  three  wives  at  one  time  and  loved  them  so 
desperately  that  I  have  lost  two  of  them  again  who 
will  now  get  other  bridegrooms.  As  for  the  third, 
I  am  hardly  keeping  hold  of  her  by  the  left  arm,  she 
too  will  perhaps  soon  be  snatched  from  me.  But  you, 
you  are  a  slothful  lover,  you  do  not  even  venture  to 
become  the  husband  of  one  wife." 

An  unbiased  reader  of  these  lines  will  immediately 
see  that  here  again  the  humorist  Luther  is  speaking. 
We  know  that  the  Reformer  at  this  time  already  har- 
bored thoughts  of  marrying.  Several  chances  were 
open  to  him  but  he  cared  to  accept  neither.  In  this 
sense  he  speaks  jestingly  of  his  three  wives,  in  much 
the  same  manner  as  Uncle  Braesig  of  his  three  brides. 
Pater  Denifle,  however,  does  not  appreciate  the  joke. 
He  pins  Luther  down  to  the  words :  tres  uxores  simul 
habuij,  and  concludes  therefrom:  The  dissolute  person 


PERSONAL  HABITS  AND  CHARACTER  217 

prior  to  his  marriage  lived  in  concubinage  with  three 
nuns  at  the  same  time.  This  interpretation,  he  feels, 
is  justified  by  the  expression  misceor  feminis  a  few 
lines  above,  for  five  years  earlier  Luther  uses  the  same 
words  in  the  sense  which  would,  taken  literally,  lend 
color  to  Denifle's  interpretation.  However,  the  strict 
critic  in  this  case  did  not  carefully  scrutinize  Luther's 
words.  The  Reformer  writes:  I  who  write  so  much 
concerning  women,  et  sic  misceor  feminis.  This  "sic" 
shows  clearly  what  Luther  means:  "I  write  so  much 
concerning  marriage  and  in  this  wise  have  to  do  with 
women."  This  evidence  therefore  does  not  fulfill  what 
it  promises. 

However,  there  is  seemingly  a  better  proof,  the  let- 
ter of  Melanchthon  to  Camerarius  of  the  sixteenth  of 
June,  1525,  which  is  known  to  us  in  the  original  only 
for  about  three  decades.  "Luther  married  Bora  un- 
expectedly without  informing  any  of  his  friends  of  his 
purpose.  In  the  evening  he  invited  only  Pomeranus 
(Bugenhagen,  the  city  pastor  of  Wittenberg),  the 
painter  Lucas  Cranach  and  Dr.  Apel  for  supper  and 
celebrated  the  wedding  with  the  customary  formali- 
ties. You  will,  perhaps,  be  surprised  that  at  this  un- 
happy juncture,  when  upright  and  right-thinking  men 
are  everywhere  being  oppressed  he  is  not  also  suffer- 
ing, but  to  all  appearance  leads  an  easy  life  and  en- 
dangers his  reputation,  notwithstanding  that  just  now 
Germany  stands  in  need  of  all  his  wisdom  and  au- 
thority. It  appears,  however,  that  the  occurrence  can 
be  explained  as  follows:  The  man  is  very  easily  led, 
and  so  the  nuns  who  pursued  him  with  all  manner  of 


218  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

cunning  have  ensnared  him.  Perhaps  all  this  close 
association  with  them  has  rendered  him  effeminate  or 
influenced  his  passions,  noble  and  high-minded  though 
he  is.  He  seems  in  this  fashion  to  have  been  drawn 
into  the  untimely  change  in  his  mode  of  life.  It  is 
obvious,  however,  that  the  gossip  concerning  his  pre- 
vious criminal  intercourse  with  her  (Bora)  was  a 
falsehood.  Now  that  the  thing  is  done  it  is  useless 
to  take  it  amiss  or  to  find  fault  with  it,  for  if  I  see 
the  situation  aright  nature  impelled  him  to  matri- 
mony. Even  though  this  mode  of  life  is  low,  yet  it  is 
holy  and  more  pleasing  to  God  than  the  unmarried 
state.  And  since  I  see  that  Luther  is  somewhat  sad 
and  troubled  about  this  change  in  his  way  of  living, 
I  seek  very  earnestly  to  encourage  him  by  represent- 
ing to  him  that  he  has  done  nothing  which  in  my  opin- 
ion can  be  made  a  subject  of  reproach  to  him  or  which 
he  could  not  justify.  Besides,  I  have  no  lack  of  proofs 
of  his  piety,  so  that  a  derogatory  judgment  about  him 
is  out  of  place.  In  reality  I  had  always  hoped  that  he 
would  experience  some  humiliation  rather  than  that 
he  should  be  granted  advancement  and  honor.  For 
the  latter  are  dangerous  not  only  for  priests  but  for 
all  men.  Since  well-being  gives  opportunity  for  base 
sentiments  to  crop  out,  not  onlj^,  as  the  orator 
(Demosthenes)  has  said,  in  the  case  of  the  unlearned 
but  also  with  the  wise.  Also  I  am  in  hopes  that  the 
married  state  will  make  him  more  dignified  and  that 
he  now  will  lay  aside  the  buffoonery  which  we  so  often 
have  criticized.  For,  as  the  old  saw  is,  a  different  life 
brings  about  a  change  in  the  mode  of  living.    I  am 


PERSONAL  HABITS  AND  CHARACTER  219 

writing  you  so  much  in  detail  about  this  that  you  will 
not  permit  yourself  to  be  too  much  disconcerted  by  the 
unexpected  event.  I  know,  of  course,  that  you  have 
Luther's  good  name  at  heart  and  that  you  will  be 
pained  if  it  is  in  any  way  besmirched.  I  exhort  you  to 
bear  this  matter  with  patience,  seeing  that  Holy  Writ 
says  that  marriage  is  to  be  highly  esteemed.  Very 
probably  nature  impelled  him  also  to  marriage.  God 
has  shown  us  by  the  numerous  mistakes  committed  by 
the  saints  in  earlier  ages  that  he  wishes  us  to  prove  his 
Word  and  not  rely  upon  the  reputation  of  any  man 
but  only  on  his  Word.  He  would  indeed  be  a  wholly 
godless  person  who  on  account  of  a  false  step  of  the 
teacher  condemns  his  teachings." 

This  letter  mirrors  a  peculiarly  discordant  frame  of 
mind.  The  married  state  is  low,  but  it  is  holy,  never- 
theless. Luther  by  marrying  has  abased  himself,  com- 
mitted a  blunder,  but,  on  the  other  hand,  he  has  done 
nothing  worthy  of  censure  and  must  not  be  con- 
demned. What  follows  from  this?  The  writer  is  in  a 
passionate  state  of  excitement;  Luther's  marriage 
completely  surprised  him.  He  was  never  favorably 
disposed  toward  it,  especially  not  now  in  these  trying 
times  of  the  great  German  Revolution.  Besides,  he 
feels  deeply  hurt  personally,  because  Luther  under- 
took this  important  step  without  first  saying  a  word 
to  him  about  his  intentions.  In  this  condition  of  mind 
he  speaks  in  hostile  terms  of  Luther,  scornfully  of 
Catharine  von  Bora,  and  permits  suppositions  about 
the  earlier  history  of  the  union  to  escape  him  which 
are  equally  insulting  to  Luther  and  to  Catharine  von 
Bora. 


220  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

Therein  lies  the  verdict  on  the  historical  value  cf 
the  letter.  It  is  of  interest  as  documentary  proof  of 
Melanchthon's  excitable  frame  of  mind  in  that  event- 
ful month  of  June  of  the  year  1525.  It  is  further  sig- 
nificant as  a  new  piece  of  evidence  on  the  high  tension 
existing  at  the  time  between  Luther  and  Melanchthon 
on  account  of  the  controversy  with  Erasmus.  The 
suppositions  about  the  previous  history  of  the  mar- 
riage of  Luther,  which  Melanchthon  himself  stamps 
as  mere  suppositions,  carry  no  more  weight  than  con- 
jectures by  impassioned  and  malevolent  critics  other- 
wise. Had  Melanchthon  himself  taken  them  at  face 
value  it  would  be  difficult  to  understand  why  his  atti- 
tude changed  so  soon  that  he  not  only  himself  took 
part  in  Luther's  pubHc  wedding  festival  on  the  twen- 
ty-seventh of  June,  but  on  his  own  responsibility  in  a 
note  of  the  twentieth  or  twenty-first  of  that  month  in- 
vited Wenzel  Link  to  attend  the  ceremony,  even  in- 
serting a  jest  about  Jerome  Baumgaertner,  Catha- 
rine's old  suitor.  Besides,  we  have  very  peculiar 
proofs  from  other  situations  of  what  Melanchthon  was 
capable  of  in  moments  of  excitement.  They  are  his 
letter  to  the  papal  legate  Campeggio  from  the  days  of 
the  Diet  at  Augsburg,  and  his  missive  to  the  Saxon 
Minister  von  Carlowitz  from  the  period  of  the  Augs- 
burg Interim.  The  letter  cited  above  must  be  placed 
on  the  same  level  with  these,  for  it  certainly  is  not 
evidence  of  spiritual  greatness. 

Hence  we  will  do  well  not  to  employ  Magister 
Philippus  but  Luther  himself  as  crown  witness  for  the 
earlier  history  of  his  marriage.    He  not  infrequently 


PERSONAL  HABITS  AND  CHARACTER  221 

spoke  also  about  this  episode  of  his  hfe  with  his 
characteristic  frankness.  He  wished  to  marry,  in  the 
first  place,  in  order  to  fulfill  a  wish  of  his  aged  father, 
secondly,  that  he  might  honor  holy  wedlock  by  personal 
example  on  his  part  also,  thirdly,  in  order  to  anger  the 
Papists.  All  these  ends  he  fully  achieved.  That  he 
was  not  "wood  and  stone"  over  against  the  fair  sex 
he  openly  confessed  in  a  letter  to  Spalatin  of  the  thir- 
tieth of  November,  1524.  However,  this  feeling  was 
not  so  strong  that  for  this  reason  alone  he  felt  a  desire 
to  marry.  This  he  directly  declares  to  be  out  of  the 
question  in  that  same  letter.  And  since  at  the  time  he 
was  already  forty-two  years  old  there  is  no  reason 
whatever  to  doubt  his  testimony.  It  is  more  likely 
that  he  was  partly  impelled  to  this  decision  by  a  "long- 
ing for  a  regulated  home  life,"  which  at  his  age  is  a 
much  more  natural  feeling  than  youthful  infatuation. 
For  his  bachelor  existence  in  the  Black  Cloister  was 
not  exactly  an  enviable  one.  In  the  last  year  before 
his  marriage,  for  instance,  he  had  no  one  to  take  care 
of  his  bed.  He  therefore  always  slept  in  an  unmade 
bed  so  that  finally,  the  bedclothes  and  the  straw  began 
to  decay.  "I  knew  nothing  of  this,  for  I  was  tired, 
having  worked  hard  the  whole  day,  and  simply 
dropped  into  bed,"  he  himself  tells  his  table  compan- 
ions in  1540. 

Luther  also  did  not  fail  to  answer  the  question  why 
he  finally  decided  on  Catharine  von  Bora.  Catharine 
had  for  nearly  two  years  harbored  a  sincere  affection 
for  a  young  Niirnberg  patrician,  Jerome  Baumgaert- 
ner.    But  since  she  was  desperately  poor  the  practical 


222  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

young  man  finally  dissolved  the  relationship.  Luther, 
who  had  zealously  furthered  the  match  now  tried  with 
his  characteristic  energy  to  persuade  the  deserted 
young  lady  to  marry  Pastor  Glatz  of  Orlamuende. 
Catharine  vigorously  opposed  the  project,  in  fact,  one 
day  she  told  Professor  Amsdorf  in  so  many  words: 
Him  or  Luther  she  would  marry,  but  Glatz  never. 
This  very  frank  declaration,  as  far  as  we  know,  first 
gave  Luther  the  idea  of  paying  court  to  the  not  very 
sympathetic  Saxon  noblewoman,  and  as  he  drastically 
enough  says  "to  take  pity  on  the  deserted  young 
woman." 

There  is,  therefore,  absolutely  nothing  romantic 
about  this  marriage  which  has  created  more  of  a  stir 
than  any  other  union  of  which  we  know.  Hence  it  is 
ridiculous  when  even  to-day  the  forty-two-year-old 
bridegroom  is  represented  as  an  infatuated  student 
of  twenty,  and  the  bride  who  was  twenty-seven  and 
had  just  overcome  the  effects  of  an  unrequited  love 
is  set  down  as  an  enthusiastic  young  girl  of  seventeen. 
Romance  ever  remained  absent  from  the  wedded  life 
of  this  mature  couple.  The  prematurely  aging  and 
always  ailing  husband  and  the  very  active,  energetic, 
prudent  and  not  uneducated  wife  were  soon  sincerely 
attached  to  each  other  and  lived  in  very  harmonious 
and  faithful  wedlock.  But  one  seeks  in  vain  in  their 
wedded  life  for  the  sickly  sentimentality  and  extrava- 
gance of  feeling  which  later  ages  regarded  as  the  in- 
dispensable sign  of  a  successful  marriage.  If  the 
"wholesome  philistinism"  of  the  German  national 
character,  which  strikes  the  foreigner  as  so  strange  and 


PERSONAL  HABITS  AND  CHARACTER  223 

yet  was  always  a  source  of  strength  for  Germany, 
becomes  manifest  anywhere  it  is  in  the  wedlock  of  the 
Reformer. 

That  a  monk  like  Father  Denifle  should  be  shocked 
by  Luther's  naive  utterances  about  his  wedded  bliss, 
and  that  he  sees  in  the  concubinage  of  the  celibate 
priests  "a  less  serious  transgression"  than  in  this  "sta- 
ble relationship"  (liaison),  which  the  Protestants  call 
Luther's  "married  life,"  is  not  surprising.  A  monk  is 
not  quite  competent  to  judge  such  matters ;  he  is  likely 
to  be  without  the  candor  toward  that  which  is  natural 
and  thus  unable  to  give  an  objective  opinion.  Any- 
one who  reads  the  naive  confessions  of  the  married 
Luther  with  an  unprejudiced  mind  discovers  nowhere 
the  Luther  whom  Denifle  has  branded  as  a  "urist" 
and  will  detect  in  the  annals  of  this  marriage  which 
has  been  maligned  in  such  an  unutterably  base  and 
vile  manner  absolutely  nothing  exceptional.  Fur- 
thermore, he  will  be  unable  to  regard  the  incredible 
"jokes"  of  the  priest  Cochlaeus  and  of  his  fellow  in 
spirit,  the  writer  Lemnius,  as  merely  "crude  realism" 
but  will  look  upon  them  only  as  the  product  of  a  hope- 
lessly degenerate  imagination. 

All  this,  however,  does  not  yet  exhaust  the  catalogue 
of  the  sins  of  Doctor  Martinus.  The  urist,  pornog- 
rapher,  ribald,  drunkard,  glutton  and  crass  igno- 
ramus lastly  reveals  himself  besides  as  a  common  for- 
ger and  liar.  In  this  guise  also  the  Reformer  is  not 
now  presented  to  the  world  for  the  first  time.  Even 
during  his  lifetime  he  was  frequently  branded  as  a 
falsifier  of  the  Bible.    He  personally  answered  this 


224  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

charge  briefly  in  his  telhng  "Open  Letter  on  the  Art 
of  Translating"  of  the  year  1530.  Father  Denifle 
does  not  take  up  this  accusation.  From  the  point  of 
view  of  confessional  polemics  this  point  is  so  thor- 
oughly settled  that  it  is  hopeless  to  say  any  more  about 
it  or  bring  about  an  understanding  between  the 
parties. 

Denifle,  however,  believes  that  he  has  caught  the 
"rogue"  at  a  considerable  number  of  forgeries.  He, 
in  fact,  does  prove  that  Luther  occasionally  cites  ec- 
clesiastical writers  incorrectly,  and  that  he  sometimes 
draws  far-reaching  conclusions  from  wrong  quota- 
tions. He  might  have  considerably  increased  the 
number  of  these  proofs,  so  large  is  the  list  of  incorrect 
citations  in  the  works  of  the  Reformer.  What  fol- 
lows from  this?  In  the  first  place  only  the  fact  that 
Luther  worked  rapidly  and  ofttimes  did  not  take  the 
trouble  of  verifying  his  references.  At  times  also  he 
was  forced  to  depend  altogether  on  his  memory,  as, 
for  instance,  in  the  treatise  "On  the  Monastic  Vows" 
of  1521-22,  which  Denifle  has  particularly  torn  to 
pieces  by  his  criticism.  For  this  work  was  written  at 
the  Wartburg  where  Luther  had  no  library  at  his  com- 
mand. That  also  his  memory  was  not  always  ac- 
curate, that  at  times  he  erred  greatly,  that  occasion- 
ally he  altogether  misunderstood  the  writers  whom  he 
consulted  is  a  weakness  which  he  shares  with  very 
famous  scholars,  for  instance,  with  Father  Denifle. 
As  little,  however,  as  anyone  now  would  designate  the 
errors  of  Father  Denifle  as  forgeries,  so  little  is  any- 
one justified  in  denying  that  the  erring  Luther  pos- 


PERSONAL  HABITS  AND  CHARACTER  225 

sessed  the  bona  fides,  especially  since  Luther  had  to 
work  much  more  rapidly  and  commanded  a  much 
poorer  scientific  apparatus  than  a  modern  scholar. 

If  then  the  Reformer  was  not  a  forger,  did  he  not 
assume  an  equivocal  attitude  toward  the  behests  of 
truthfulness,  and  did  he  not  himself  flagrantly  trans- 
gress this  commandment?  Indeed,  he  did  not  hesitate 
to  declare  that  "white  lies"  were  theoretically  permis- 
sible, and  in  one  famous  case  he  directly  demanded 
such  a  white  lie.  These  are  facts  which  are  fixed  be- 
yond a  doubt.  But  let  us  in  this  instance  also  first  hear 
the  accused  before  we  indulge  in  the  supreme  enjoy- 
ment of  a  sensation  of  moral  indignation. 

Luther  terms  those  lies  "white  lies"  which  are  told  in 
the  interest  and  for  the  love  of  one's  fellow  man,  as 
for  instance  the  false  statement  made  by  the  Egyptian 
midwives  for  the  benefit  of  the  Hebrew  child  which 
Pharaoh  had  commanded  them  to  throw  into  the  Nile. 
(Ex.  1 :  18, 19.)  Some  of  the  theologians  of  the  primi- 
tive church,  as,  for  instance,  Hilary,  John  Chrysostom 
and  Cassian,  had  in  their  day  declared  such  falsehoods 
to  be  unobjectionable.  Augustine,  however,  followed 
by  Thomas  Aquinas  (Summa  II,  2,  110)  and  his 
school,  asserted  that  they  were  sinful.  However,  these 
latter  teachers  always  regarded  this  type  of  falsehood 
as  a  light  sin,  and  on  the  other  hand  held  the  prudent 
conceahng  of  the  truth,  the  act  of  dissimulation,  to  be 
permissible. 

Other  theologians  believed  that  under  certain  cir- 
cumstances it  was  a  greater  sin  to  say  the  truth  than 
to  tell  a  "white  lie."    For  according  to  their  view  God 


226  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

unconditionally  forbids  only  the  lie  which  works  harm 
(mendacium  adversus  proximum  prohibet),  while  he 
merely  curbs  the  white  lie.  {Pro  proximo  cohibet.) 
Luther  joined  this  latter  view  but  in  so  doing  he  went 
his  own  way  in  some  respects  though  he  employed 
almost  the  same  examples  to  make  his  point  clear. 
He  noted  that  the  holy  patriarchs  in  the  Bible  oc- 
casionally made  use  of  this  type  of  falsehood  without 
being  censured  by  the  sacred  writers  for  their  con- 
duct. In  fact,  it  seemed  to  him  as  though  even  Paul, 
Christ  and  God  himself  had  at  times  not  said  exactly 
what  they  meant.  To  Luther  this  proved  the  ad- 
missibility not  of  the  common  emergency  lie  {Not- 
luege),  but  of  the  utility  lie  (Nutzluege),  that  is,  the 
falsehood  which  is  told  for  the  benefit  and  good  of 
one's  fellow  man. 

No  Protestant  of  to-day  will  further  sanction  this 
method  of  proof.  That,  however,  does  not  prove 
that  the  Reformer  was  wrong  in  the  matter  itself.  In 
fact,  most  ethical  writers  even  now  think  substan- 
tially as  he  did,  if  we  except  a  few  rigorists.  These 
latter,  however,  are,  because  of  their  principles,  only 
too  often  in  the  greater  and  lesser  troubles  of  this  life 
placed  in  a  dilemma.  This  is  shown  by  the  example 
of  their  leader,  Immanuel  Kant,  who  in  theory  sol- 
emnly condemns  every  kind  of  falsehood  as  base,  but 
in  practice  was  himself  "base"  enough  to  permit  him- 
self such  a  "baseness"  — namely,  an  amphiboly,  a  men- 
tal reservation,  that  is,  a  common,  ordinary  white  lie. 
What  is  more,  he  did  this  in  a  "most  solemn"  declara- 
tion to  King  Frederick  William  II  of  Prussia  whom 


PERSONAL  HABITS  AND  CHARACTER  227 

he  greets  "most  devotedly."  (The  Conflict  of  the 
Faculties,  Introduction,  ed.  by  Rosenkranz,  vii.,  p. 
257.) 

However,  notwithstanding  the  fact  that  the  Re- 
former exhibited  a  more  correct  judgment  on  this 
point  than  the  great  sage  of  Koenigsberg,  it  is  still 
very  much  an  open  question  whether  in  the  one  famous 
case  where  Luther  demanded  a  white  lie  he  was  mor- 
ally justified  in  so  doing.  For  in  this  renowned  in- 
stance it  was  not  a  question  of  averting,  but  of  hush- 
ing up  "a  manifest  crime,"  namely,  the  keeping  secret 
of  the  "Turkish  marriage"  which  the  Landgrave 
Philip  of  Hesse  had  on  the  fourth  of  March,  1540,  at 
Rothenburg  on  the  Fulda  contracted  with  Margaret 
von  der  Saale.  The  only  question  is,  did  Luther  re- 
gard this  Turkish  marriage  as  a  manifest  crime,  and 
did  he  not  perhaps  even  look  upon  its  concealment  as 
necessary  for  moral  reasons? 

As  far  as  the  first  part  of  this  question  is  concerned 
it  has  long  ago  been  determined  that  for  many  years 
prior  to  the  affair  of  the  Hessian  marriage  the  Re- 
former held  bigamy  to  be  permissible.  As  early  as 
1520,  in  the  treatise  on  the  Babylonian  Captivity, 
Luther  publicly  avows  that  he  would  sooner  give  his 
consent  to  a  double  marriage  than  to  the  severance  of 
a  union  legally  existing  before  God.  And  in  keeping 
with  this  attitude  he,  since  1520,  ever  again  confesses, 
not  only  in  confidential  arbitraments  but  also  in  some 
pronouncements  intended  for  the  public  in  general, 
that  polygamy  is  not  forbidden  to  Christians  by  the 
New  Testament.  He  holds  that  in  serious  emergencies, 


228  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

for  instance,  if  the  wife  contracts  leprosy  or  is  in  some 
other  way  taken  from  her  husband,  he  cannot  be  hin- 
dered from  taking  a  second  spouse.  However,  this 
permission  ought  always  remain  confined  to  such  seri- 
ous emergencies.  The  idea  of  legalizing  polygamy 
ever  remained  foreign  to  the  Reformer.  He  always 
considered  monogamy  as  the  regular  form  of  wedlock, 
though  he  did  not  until  later  emphatically  state  that 
it  alone  was  fully  and  completely  in  accordance  with 
the  divine  order  of  the  universe.  Only  on  one  point 
did  Luther  change  his  opinion  in  the  course  of  time, 
namely,  on  the  question  whether  a  husband  in  the 
emergencies  mentioned  ought  to  enter  upon  a  second 
union  publicly,  or  whether  he  ought  to  do  so  secretly. 
In  September,  1531,  Luther  still  regarded  it  as  per- 
missible that  King  Henry  VIII  of  England  should 
marry  Anne  Boleyn  as  his  second  wife  and  queen. 
Later  he  would  have  dispensation  granted  for  such 
a  secondary  union  only  if  the  same  were  kept  a  strict 
secret. 

Luther  never  left  his  hearers  or  readers  in  doubt  as 
to  how  he  arrived  at  these  views,  which  to  us  seem  so 
strange.  Abraham  certainly  was  a  true  Christian  and 
a  man  filled  with  the  Holy  Spirit  who,  nevertheless, 
lived  a  polygamous  life.  Hence  this  form  of  marriage 
cannot  be  directly  contrary  to  divine  law.  Further- 
more, the  gospel,  since  it  contains  revelations  of  God 
which  have  reference  only  to  the  inner  life,  has  not 
cancelled  the  permissions  of  the  law  of  Moses  in  this 
respect.  Therefore,  even  to-day  the  Christian  laity 
cannot  be  prohibited  from  making  use  of  this  conces- 


PERSONAL  HABITS  AND  CHARACTER  229 

sion  but  only,  and  Luther  emphasizes  this  point,  the 
Christian  laity.  The  clergy  have,  according  to  I  Tim. 
3:2,  been  expressly  bidden  to  be  content  with  one  wife. 
These  statements  of  the  Reformer  roused  attention 
very  soon.  His  old  adversary  Cochlaeus  assailed  him 
on  this  account  as  early  as  1528,  and  the  authors  of 
the  Catholic  Confutation  intended  to  protest  openly 
against  these  views  at  the  Diet  of  Augsburg  in  1530. 
However,  did  Luther  stand  alone  in  this  matter?  By 
no  means.  Melanchthon,  Butzer,  Karlstadt  and 
Capito  shared  his  opinion,  while  the  Anabaptists  even 
legally  introduced  polygamy  in  Muenster  on  the 
twenty-third  of  July,  1534.  In  the  Catholic  camp 
itself  there  was  by  no  means  a  dearth  of  men  who 
held  similar  opinions  on  this  question.  Cardinal  Ca- 
jetan,  for  instance,  believed  that  the  Pope  could  grant 
dispensation  for  bigamy,  and  in  the  marriage  negotia- 
tions of  Henry  VIII,  he  expressly  advised  Clement 
VII  to  make  use  of  this  power  in  order  to  obviate 
more  serious  trouble.  The  Pope,  accordingly,  in  the 
consistory  laid  before  the  cardinals  the  question 
whether  a  dispensation  of  this  sort  were  permissible 
or  not.  They  rephed  in  the  negative.  From  all  this 
it  is  evident  that  the  discussion  on  the  admissibility  of 
bigamy  was  not  broached  for  the  first  time  by  the 
double  marriage  of  the  Landgrave.  Quite  to  the  con- 
trary, it  had  been  in  progress  for  a  long  time  when 
Philip  entered  upon  his  Turkish  marriage.  Indeed, 
it  was  this  very  discussion  which  first  gave  him  the 
idea  of  seeking  a  remedy  for  moral  and  domestic 
misery  in  this  unusual  manner. 


230  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

Philip  had  married  in  1523  when  he  was  nineteen 
years  old.  The  wife  selected  for  him  was,  however, 
unable  in  the  least  to  gain  his  affections.  In  fact,  she 
was  so  repugnant  to  him  that  he  seems  to  have  con- 
ceived the  plan  of  a  second  marriage  as  early  as  1526. 
However,  Luther's  faithful  admonition  and  advice 
induced  him  to  give  up  the  idea  for  the  present.  But 
his  physical  antipathy  toward  his  unamiable  spouse 
rather  increased  with  the  years,  and  his  hot  blood  again 
and  again  seduced  him.  The  results  did  not  fail  to 
appear.  At  the  beginning  of  1539  he  fell  seriously  ill. 
In  this  condition  he  "meditated  on  many  things."  It 
became  clear  to  him  that  he  would  ruin  his  body  and 
soul  if  he  continued  his  former  mode  of  life.  Also  it 
had  become  plain  to  him  long  ago  that  he  lacked  the 
moral  strength  to  remain  continent,  and  that  much 
less  could  he  again  become  interested  in  his  wife.  He 
deemed  it  necessary,  therefore,  after  all  "to  make  use 
of  the  permission  in  the  law  of  Moses  which  neither 
Christ  nor  the  Apostles  had  abolished"  and  to  take 
unto  himself  another  wife,  and  thus  "before  God  and 
his  own  conscience  to  improve  his  position." 

However,  he  did  not  firmly  make  up  his  mind  until 
in  September,  1539,  in  the  "woman's  apartments"  of 
his  sister,  the  Duchess  Elizabeth  of  Saxony,  he  made 
the  acquaintance  of  the  seventeen-year-old  Fraiilein 
Margaret  von  der  Saale  from  Schoenfeld  in  Masovia. 
This  young  lady  he  chose  as  his  second  wife.  Though 
after  the  custom  of  the  day  he  acquainted  her  with  his 
purpose,  he  in  the  beginning  entered  on  serious  nego- 
tiations in  the  matter  only  with  her  mother,  the  "Hof- 


PERSONAL  HABITS  AND  CHARACTER  231 

meisterin"  Anna  von  der  Saale.  After  some  hesita- 
tion she  acceded  to  his  wishes  but  imposed  upon  him 
a  number  of  rather  inconvenient  conditions.  She 
deemed  it  best  that  the  new  marriage  be  immediately- 
recognized  pubhcly.  If  this  were  found  to  be  impos- 
sible, the  prince  was  at  least  to  acquaint  a  number  of 
noblemen,  a  few  "scholars,"  the  Elector  and  the  Duke 
Maurice  of  Saxony  with  the  fact,  and  to  see  to  it  that 
the  marriage  ceremony  was  performed  in  the  presence 
of  the  electoral  and  ducal  emissaries  and  of  no  less 
than  two  theologians  of  note,  be  they  Luther,  Me- 
lanchthon  or  Butzer.  Under  all  circumstances  the 
Landgrave  was  to  procure  for  her  a  testimony  from 
several  scholars  to  the  effect  that  his  project  did  not 
conflict  with  divine  ordinance.  While  the  Duch- 
ess felt  that  Luther's  consent  would  be  desirable,  she 
did  not  regard  it  as  absolutely  necessary. 

Philip  might  hope  to  reduce  these  demands  some- 
what by  further  parley.  But  unless  he  wished  at  the 
very  outset  to  give  up  his  plan,  he  would  at  least  have 
to  try  to  comply  with  the  wishes  of  the  "Hof meis- 
terin." Therefore,  all  his  actions  in  the  next  months 
are  dominated  by  the  desire  to  fulfill  the  conditions 
proposed  by  the  prudent  and  ambitious  woman.  It 
is  possible  that  he  never  frankly  confessed  this  to  him- 
self. At  any  rate  he  maintained  absolute  silence  about 
the  affair  even  toward  his  most  confidential  advisers, 
and  from  the  first,  without  any  indication  of  his  real 
purpose,  he  endeavored  in  a  roundabout  way  to  win 
over  all  those  persons  who  had  been  named  to  him  by 
the  "Hofmeisterin."    First  he  addressed  himself  to 


232  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

Butzer,  then,  while  this  theologian  was  on  his  way  to 
Saxony,  he  approached  his  wife,  and  finally,  after  she 
had  on  the  seventeenth  of  December,  1539,  consented 
and  the  reply  from  Saxony  had  arrived  (after  the 
middle  of  this  month) ,  he  tm-ned  to  his  own  theologians 
and  jm-ists. 

What  was  the  nature  of  the  representations  made 
for  him  in  Wittenberg  by  Butzer  in  order  that  he 
might  win  over  Luther  and  Melanchthon  and  what  did 
these  two  reformers  reply  ?  In  the  first  place,  Philip 
gave  an  impressive  account  of  the  inner  misery  from 
which  he  was  suffering  because  of  his  unhappy  union 
with  the  Landgravine  and  because  of  the  immoral  life 
which  that  union  conditioned.  Further,  he  asserted 
that  in  order  to  free  himself  from  this  mire  and  the 
toils  of  the  devil  "he  would  feign  make  use  of  the 
means"  which  God  had  permitted  and  marry  another 
wife.  In  view  of  these  premises  he  then  requested 
from  the  reformers,  wholly  in  keeping  with  the  wishes 
of  the  Duchess  von  der  Saale,  a  public  testimony  in 
favor  of  bigamy.  Should  this  be  impossible,  and 
should  the  step  he  proposed  to  take  for  the  present 
have  to  remain  a  secret,  he  asked  that  he  be  at  least 
given  a  "testimony  for  his  personal  use"  to  the  effect 
that  his  project  was  not  contrary  to  divine  ordinance. 

What  of  necessity  were  the  Wittenberg  theologians 
led  to  conclude  from  this  and  from  the  affecting  ac- 
count of  his  troubles  of  conscience  in  the  first  part  of 
his  instructions?  Certainly  this,  that  he  was  in  need 
of  such  a  certificate  in  order  to  definitely  assure  him- 
self whether  his  plan  was  contrary  to  God's  will  or 


PERSONAL  HABITS  AND  CHARACTER  233 

not.  But  was  this  really  the  case?  Not  at  all.  Per- 
sonally he  had  thrown  aside  all  scruples,  and  was  so 
firmly  convinced  that  it  was  permissible  for  him  to 
wed  the  bride  he  had  chosen  that  early  in  November, 
even  before  he  had  consulted  Butzer,  he  sent  his  own 
physician  to  Wiirttemberg  to  purchase  wine  for  the 
coming  nuptials  I  He  was  therefore  in  reality  no  more 
in  need  of  a  "testimony  for  his  personal  use."  He  re- 
quired such  a  document  only  for  the  purpose  of  get- 
ting the  final  consent  of  his  prospective  mother-in-law. 
Of  this,  however,  he  prudently  said  not  a  word  nor 
did  he  mention  the  fact  that  he  had  long  ago  chosen 
his  new  wife,  and  that  he  had  for  months  been  nego- 
tiating about  the  terms  of  the  marriage.  Hence  he 
consciously  deceived  Luther.  He  deluded  him,  be- 
cause he  knew  very  well  that  Doctor  Martinus  "was 
difficult  to  lead  and  more  difficult  to  drive,  but  that 
he  was  set  in  motion  automatically  whenever  he  was 
told  that  the  matter  in  question  was  one  of  danger  to 
God's  Word,  or  dealt  with  troubles  of  conscience.'* 
However,  Philip  practised  deception  on  Luther  not 
only  in  this  regard.  He  also  withheld  from  him  the 
fact  that  he  had  once  before  kept  a  concubine,  and 
that  consequently,  according  to  Luther's  opinion, 
which  he  knew  perfectly  well,  he  was  bound  and  not  in 
a  position  any  more  to  make  a  free  choice. 

The  answer  of  the  Wittenberg  theologians,  given 
the  tenth  of  December,  1539,  is  entirely  in  accord  with 
the  impression  which  they  necessarily  derived  and 
were  meant  to  derive  from  the  propositions  of  Philip. 
They  grant  him  no  public  certificate,  but  merely  "a 


234  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

testimony  and  memorandum  for  himself,"  that  is,  a 
confessional  advice.  Therein  they  set  forth  at  great 
length  that,  though  the  contracting  of  a  second  mar- 
riage was  permissible  according  to  God's  Word,  it 
was  possible  only  in  serious  emergencies  and  solely 
under  the  confessional  seal  and  upon  dispensation  by 
the  competent  pastor.  They  leave  it  to  the  Landgrave 
to  decide  whether  he  is  in  such  an  emergency.  "They 
do  not  at  all  mean  to  incite  or  urge  him  on."  On  the 
contrary,  they  earnestly  admonish  him  to  be  patient  in 
his  present  wedded  life  and  to  avoid  giving  offense. 
Nevertheless,  in  order  that  he  might  occupy  a  better 
position  before  God  and  his  conscience  they  finally,  in 
very  guarded  terms,  granted  him  dispensation  under 
the  confessional  seal  to  enter  upon  a  second  marriage. 
This  second  marriage  is,  however,  always  to  remain  a 
secret.  The  prince  is  merely  to  have  the  right  under 
the  confessional  seal  of  advising  the  bride  and  a  few 
intimates  that  the  union  is  a  regular  marriage  and  not 
mere  concubinage. 

We  can  readily  understand  why  the  Countess  von 
der  Saale  was  "sorely  troubled"  over  this  confessional 
counsel,  and  that  the  Landgrave  was  put  to  no  little 
pains  in  order  to  calm  her.  He  was  forced  to  send 
emissaries  to  Saxony  twice  after  this  before  she  was 
satisfied.  The  confessional  advice  therefore  failed 
of  its  purpose.  Not  this  counsel,  but  Philip's  assur- 
ance that  "bigamy  was  to  be  permitted  also  to  others," 
finally  moved  the  valiant  "Hofmeisterin"  to  give  her 
consent.  Now  for  the  first  time,  in  February,  1540, 
also  Margaret  von  der  Saale  was  told  about  the  re- 
solve of  her  mother  and  the  Landgrave. 


PERSONAL  HABITS  AND  CHARACTER  235 

Philip  was  even  now  still  very  solicitous  of  carrying 
out  the  wishes  of  the  "dear  Hofmeisterin."  In  ac- 
cordance with  his  promise  he  under  some  pretext  lured 
the  unsuspecting  Melanchthon  to  Rothenburg  on  the 
Fulda  that  he  might  be  present  at  the  wedding. 
Thereupon  on  the  fourth  of  March  in  direct  violation 
of  the  confessional  advice  he  had  his  union  with  Mar- 
garet solemnly  blessed  by  the  Church.  Lastly,  in 
order  to  ease  the  mind  of  his  new  mother-in-law  he 
handed  over  to  her,  together  with  other  important 
documents,  also  a  copy  of  the  confessional  advice. 
The  ambitious  lady,  therefore,  had  due  cause  to  be 
satisfied  with  him. 

Detailed  information  about  all  these  occurrences 
did  not  reach  Luther  before  the  end  of  May,  1540. 
Not  until  then,  too,  did  he  find  out  that  the  prince  had 
once  before  contracted  an  irregular  union.  This  lat- 
ter fact  enraged  him  so  that  he  declared:  "Had  I 
known  this  not  even  an  angel  from  heaven  could  have 
induced  me  to  give  such  advice."  He  now  saw  clearly 
that  Philip  had  gained  the  dispensation  surrepti- 
tiously by  a  misrepresentation  of  the  facts,  and  he  was 
quite  willing  to  admit  his  "error"  publicly,  that  is, 
to  pronounce  the  confessional  advice  null  and  void. 

But,  despite  all  this,  how  could  Luther  consistently 
assert  that  this  counsel  had  in  itself  been  correct,  and 
further,  adhere  to  the  conviction  that  every  Evan- 
gelical pastor  was  empowered  in  case  of  emergency 
under  the  confessional  seal  to  permit  a  secret  second 
marriage?  How  in  general  did  he  hit  upon  the  pe- 
culiar notion  so  downright  intolerable  for  Protestant 


236  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

feeling  that  a  clergyman  might  secretly  permit  a 
thing  which  in  secular  and  ecclesiastical  law  is  rightly 
prohibited;  that  a  pastor  in  the  confessional  had  the 
right  of  determining  what  a  layman  might  or  might 
not  do,  and  that  in  this  wise  he  had  the  duty,  as  mentor 
of  consciences,  to  guide  his  parishioners?  This  atti- 
tude is  indeed  more  than  peculiar.  At  the  first  glance, 
in  fact,  it  is  absolutely  unintelligible,  especially  in  the 
case  of  the  father  of  Protestantism.  He  himself  has, 
in  a  measure,  solved  the  riddle  for  us. 

In  July,  1540,  Luther  candidly  acknowledged  to 
the  Elector  of  Saxony  that  in  his  opinion  this  affair 
was  not  the  business  of  a  public  secular  court,  but  per- 
tained purely  to  the  confessional,  and  that  for  this 
reason  he  had  in  his  advice  followed  exactly  the  same 
procedure  which  in  similar  questions  of  the  confes- 
sional he  had  observed  in  use  while  he  was  still  a  mem- 
ber of  the  Papal  Church.  He  contends,  furthermore, 
that  liis  preceptor  in  the  monastery,  who  had  to  deal 
with  many  such  cases,  had  also  employed  the  same 
methods. 

Luther,  therefore,  formally  justifies  himself  by 
pointing  to  mediaeval  confessional  practice  and 
would  have  his  action  judged  according  to  the  rules 
and  principles  familiar  to  him  from  his  monastic  ca- 
reer. But  was  he,  as  he  claims,  really  guided  by  these 
rules  and  principles?  In  all  his  utterances  on  the 
question  of  marriage  he  always  presupposes  the  dif- 
ference between  natural  and  divine  law  on  the  one 
hand  and  positive  law  on  the  other.  That  is  good 
mediaeval  doctrine.    Further,  he  takes  it  for  granted 


PERSONAL  HABITS  AND  CHARACTER  237 

that  there  are  certain  "concessions  of  God"  which  are 
contrary  to  natural  law  but  which,  because  they  are 
testified  to  in  Scripture,  ought,  as  permissible  actions, 
still  be  respected  in  modern  times.  This  again  is  truly 
mediaeval.  Thirdly,  Luther  concludes  from  this  that 
the  father  confessor  has  the  right  to  secretly  grant 
dispensation  for  acts  which  are  forbidden  by  secular 
and  ecclesiastical  law.  The  sole  condition  is  that  such 
actions  must  be  "permissible"  either  according  to  nat- 
lu'al  law  or  in  the  sight  of  God. 

In  substance  this  is  nothing  more  than  the  medise- 
val  doctrine  of  the  dispensatio  in  foro  interno  tantum. 
And  on  the  basis  of  this  point  of  view  Luther  himself 
grants  to  the  Landgrave  such  a  dispensatio  in  foro 
interno  tantum,  thereby  assuming  the  right  of  guiding 
the  conscience  of  the  prince  quite  in  the  manner  of  a 
Catholic  father  confessor.  That  is,  his  confessional 
advice  is,  in  truth,  a  product  of  the  mediaeval  logic  of 
the  confessional,  or,  putting  it  in  other  words,  the 
father  confessor  of  former  days  in  this  grave  affair 
won  out  over  the  Reformer. 

A  single  phase  of  his  proceeding  is  noteworthy  and 
viewed  from  the  angle  of  the  present-day  Catholic  at- 
titude objectionable,  that  is,  that  Luther  felt  empow- 
ered to  grant  such  a  dispensatio  in  foro  interno  tan- 
tum even  in  case  of  bigamy.  However,  we  have  seen 
above  that  at  the  time  also  a  cardinal  of  the  Roman 
Church,  Cajetan,  regarded  such  a  dispensation  as 
permissible  and  that  even  a  pope  held  this  view  to  be 
open  for  discussion.  The  confessional  advice  of  the 
tenth  of  December,  1539,  is,  therefore,  nothing  more 


238  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

than  a  classical  proof  for  the  continuance  of  the  medi- 
eval Catholic  confessional  practice  within  the  con- 
fines of  Lutheranism.  And  it  is  by  no  means  the  first 
evidence  of  this  kind.  Luther  himself  tells  us  that  he 
repeatedly  gave  such  dispensations  to  others  also. 
Thus,  for  example,  he  says  that  he  had  advised  several 
clergymen  in  the  Duchy  of  Saxony  to  secretly  wed 
their  housekeepers  in  first  marriage,  a  thing  they  had 
no  right  to  do  according  to  the  laws  of  the  state.  Lu- 
ther consequently  strangely  enough  never  deemed  it 
wrong  to  act  as  "father  confessor,"  to  counsel  and 
guide  the  consciences.  Furthermore,  in  doing  so  he 
unhesitatingly  followed  the  rules  which  he  had  been 
taught  in  the  monastery  as  though  such  practice  were 
as  self-evident  for  an  Evangelical  pastor  as  for  a 
Catholic  priest. 

Small  wonder,  therefore,  that  throughout  his  life 
he  defended  with  equal  unconcern  also  the  mediaeval 
Catholic  teaching  about  the  inviolability  of  the  con- 
fessional, and  regardlessly  asserted  its  consequences 
under  all  circumstances.  Proof  of  this  is  again  the 
Hessian  marriage. 

The  secret  of  Rothenburg  did  not  long  remain  a 
secret.  The  sister  of  the  Landgrave,  quite  naturally 
incensed  over  the  Hes  her  brother  had  told  her,  soon 
revealed  the  affair  in  March,  1540.  The  court  at 
Dresden  instantly  and  eagerly  took  up  the  matter, 
seeing  therein  a  chance  to  make  a  good  bargain,  and 
on  the  second  of  June  had  the  new  mother-in-law  of 
Philip  arrested  forthwith.  In  the  course  of  these  pro- 
ceedings several  of  the  incriminatory  documents  which 


PERSONAL  HABITS  AND  CHARACTER  239 

the  lady  had  received  at  Rothenburg  came  to  light. 
In  these  sore  straits  Philip  requested  permission  from 
his  allies  to  announce  his  new  marriage  in  due  form, 
and  in  order  to  render  them  amenable  he  plainly- 
threatened  to  publish  the  Wittenberg  confessional  ad- 
vice. Luther,  however,  was  not  for  a  moment  intimi- 
dated by  this  threat.  He  opposed  the  wishes  of  the 
Landgrave  with  all  his  might.  At  the  Eisenach  con- 
ference in  July,  1540,  he  unconditionally  demanded 
from  the  Hessian  mediators  that  the  prince  make  a 
public  and  straight  denial  of  the  existence  of  his  new 
union.  Indeed,  he  requested  that  in  order  to  silence 
the  gossipers,  Philip  tell  a  straight  untruth,  or  a 
utility  he  (white  lie) .  Should  he,  in  spite  of  all,  per- 
sist in  making  public  the  confessional  advice,  he  would 
write  against  him  and  confess  openly  that  he,  Luther, 
had  erred,  that  is,  he  would  declare  the  counsel  in- 
valid. 

Philip  has  often  been  praised  for  answering  to  this 
demand  which  was  made  upon  him  also  by  Butzer 
and  by  the  electoral  court  of  Saxony:  "I  will  not  lie, 
for  lies  sound  badly ;  besides,  no  Apostle  ever  taught 
a  Christian  to  speak  untruth,  indeed,  Christ  has  ex- 
plicitly forbidden  it  and  said  that  one  ought  to  abide 
by  Yes  and  No."  However,  the  Landgrave  certainly 
did  not  deserve  this  commendation ;  for  how  often  and 
brazenly  had  he  not  in  this  affair  lied  to  his  own  sister! 
Furthermore,  was  he  in  reality  ready  to  abide  by  Yes 
and  No?  "If  some  one  should  ask  me  about  the  mat- 
ter," he  says  in  the  same  breath,  "I  will  make  him  a 
dark  answer,"  that  is,  putting  it  in  plain  English,  mis- 
lead the  inquirer. 


240  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

However,  though  we  have  no  right  to  set  up  the 
Landgrave  as  a  model  of  virtue  over  against  Doctor 
Martinus  the  fact  remains  that  Luther  counseled  him 
to  tell  a  falsehood.     The  only  question  is:  How  did 
Luther  come  by  this  "criminal  idea"?    He  personally 
always  replies  briefly  and  laconically:  Because  we 
have  to  deal  here  with  a  confessional  advice.    He  holds 
that  just  as  it  is  not  permitted  the  father  confessor  to 
divulge  any  part  of  what  he  learns  in  the  confessional 
so  also  the  penitent  is  in  duty  bound  to  observe  silence 
about  the  advice  obtained  in  the  confession.    Likewise, 
as  the  father  confessor  may,  under  certain  circum- 
stances, be  forced  to  swear  a  false  oath  in  order  to 
guard  the  sanctity  of  the  confessional,  so  also  the 
confessing  penitent  is  under  certain  conditions  held 
to  protect  this  secrecy  by  a  "straight  white  lie." 
Is  this  point  of  view  after  all  as  unusual  as  it  is 
ordinarily  represented  to  be?    No.    At  present  still 
Catholic  theologians   teach:   "Also   the   penitent  is 
obliged  to  observe  natural  secrecy  on  all  those  mat- 
ters, which  he  cannot  divulge  without  inflicting  an 
unjust  injury  upon  the  father  confessor."     At  the 
very  time   of  Luther,   in   fact,   the   theologians   in 
whose  views  he  had  been  brought  up,  the  Moderns 
or  the  Okkamists,  claimed  that  whoever  tells  tales 
out  of  confession  commits  a  mortal  sin.     This,  self- 
evidently,  for  confessional  practice,  led  to  the  con- 
clusion:   Therefore    one    ought    sooner    advise    the 
confessing    penitent    to    tell    an    untruth    than    to 
break  the  sacredness  of  the  confessional.     For  the 
white  lie  is  merely  a  venial  sin  and  consequently  is 


PERSONAL  HABITS  AND  CHARACTER  241 

directly  advisable  in  such  a  case  in  order  to  avoid  a 
greater  evil.  What  follows  from  this?  Luther's  de- 
mand for  a  white  lie  is  merely  a  result  of  the  doctrine 
of  the  Okkamists  about  the  inviolability  of  the  con- 
fessional, to  which  he  always  adhered. 

However,  this  does  not  yet  fully  clear  up  the  situa- 
tion. We  may  ask :  Had  the  Landgrave  really  confessed 
to  Luther,  and  was  the  latter  therefore  in  reality  em- 
powered over  against  him  to  call  upon  the  old  Catho- 
lic tenets  about  the  confessional  seal?  Indeed,  a  "sac- 
ramental confession"  had  in  this  case  not  taken  place. 
But,  according  to  Catholic  doctrine,  this  was  not  and 
is  not  now  at  all  necessary  in  order  to  furnish  a  basis 
for  the  plea  of  sacramental  secrecy.  "If  any  person, 
merely  for  the  purpose  of  securing  confessional  ad- 
vice, reveals  to  the  father  confessor  the  state  of  his 
conscience  the  duty  of  sacramental  secrecy  is  thereby 
imposed."     ( Gury :  Moraltheologie  II,  648,  3. ) 

All  these  facts  help  us  to  understand  why  the  Re- 
former never  felt  any  qualms  of  conscience  about  the 
affair  of  the  Hessian  marriage.  It  was  very  hard  for 
Luther  to  grant  dispensation  for  bigamy  to  the  Land- 
grave, but  he  was  convinced  that  he  was  empowered  to 
do  so,  since  bigamy  in  case  of  necessity  was  allowed  by 
God.  Furthermore,  deceived  by  the  false  statements 
of  Philip,  he  believed  that  his  case  was  one  involving 
such  a  necessity.  Later  on  in  order  to  guard  the  con- 
fessional seal  he  advised  a  white  lie.  Here  again,  how- 
ever, he  felt  that  he  had  a  moral  right  to  do  so.  For 
he  looked  upon  breach  of  confessional  secrecy  as  a 
serious  crime,  to  avert  which  he  deemed  a  white  lie 


242  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

just  as  permissible  as  for  the  avoidance  of  murder  or 
homicide.  Consequently,  Luther  did  only  what  other- 
wise also  he  regarded  as  his  right  and  duty  as  a  con- 
fessor. 

Unfortunately,  as  the  documents  show,  he  never 
took  into  account  the  political  phase  of  the  affair,  and 
as  usual  never  even  dreamed  of  the  consequences 
which  his  actions  might  have  for  his  own  reputation. 
Unhappily,  he  judged  the  whole  matter  only  from  the 
narrow  perspective  of  the  confessional,  and  from  out 
of  an  honest  desire  to  assist  a  seemingly  despairing 
man  to  a  better  standing  before  God  and  his  con- 
science. He  utterly  forgot,  as  so  often,  that  he  had 
long  ere  this  laid  aside  the  cowl  of  the  priest.  If  this 
be  taken  into  account  one  may  still  deplore  the  stand 
Luther  took  in  the  Hessian  marriage  tangle,  but  one 
cannot  condemn  it,  much  less  use  it  to  prove  the  moral 
inferiority  of  his  new  religious  principles.  For  with 
these  new  tenets  it  has  nothing  whatever  to  do.  On 
the  contrary,  it  is  an  after  effect  of  the  old  mediaeval 
Catholic  teachings,  and  the  classical  proof  how 
strongly  at  times  still  his  earlier  habits  of  thought  and 
the  pastoral  methods  of  the  old  faith  influenced  Lu- 
ther's actions  even  after  he  had  long  broken  away  from 
them  in  principle. 

The  Reformer  himself  often  emphatically  declared : 
"My  person  anyone  who  wishes  may  attack,  I  do  not 
pose  as  a  saint."  Both  his  contemporaries  and  the 
later  world  eagerly  accepted  this  invitation,  as  though 
humanity  had  no  more  urgent  concern  than  to  burn 
this  heretic  in  effigy  after  his  death,  at  least,  since  un- 


PERSONAL  HABITS  AND  CHARACTER  243 

fortunately  neither  Pope  nor  Emperor  were  able  to 
bring  him  to  the  rack  or  the  stake  during  his  life.  And 
what  are  the  net  results  of  the  heresy  trial  which  has 
now  been  dragging  on  for  three  hundred  and  ninety- 
five  years?  The  proceedings  must  be  quashed.  For 
most  of  the  charges  brought  against  the  defendant 
have  turned  out  to  be  crude  falsehoods,  others  cannot 
be  upheld  because  the  accused  manifestly  acted  in 
good  faith.  This  is  above  all  true  of  the  Hessian  con- 
fessional advice  and  of  his  insulting  remarks  about 
the  Papacy. 

Does  this  close  the  case  of  Luther?  By  no  means. 
So  far  it  has  only  been  proven  that  the  advocate  of  the 
devil  has  no  claim  upon  this  man  even  though  he  was 
not  a  saint,  and  that  the  accused  during  his  whole  life 
labored  under  the  hindering  influences  which  educa- 
tion and  environment  exert  upon  the  thought  and  ac- 
tion even  of  the  strongest,  most  mature  and  most 
independent  human  beings.  But  by  no  means  have 
we  thus  gained  a  clear  picture  of  the  whole,  the  real 
Luther.  For  the  whole  Luther  one  never  learns 
to  know  if  one  permits  his  accusers  to  prescribe 
the  course  of  observation.  The  complete  Luther  re- 
veals himself  only  to  him  who  meets  him  face  to  face, 
and  undeterred  by  friend  or  enemy  permits  the  per- 
sonality of  the  Reformer  to  act  upon  himself  in  all  its 
fullness  and  strength.  Therefore,  the  negative  result 
of  almost  four  centuries  of  trial  necessitates  a  positive 
supplement.  The  supplying  of  this  missing  phase, 
however,  may  be  left  to  the  reader.  Only  this  must 
still  be  pointed  out  that  only  if  one  makes  an  unbiased 


244  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

study  of  the  whole  Luther  do  the  f  aihngs  and  weak- 
nesses which  his  accusers  play  up  so  vividly  appear  in 
the  proper  projections. 

This  is  especially  true  if,  for  the  sake  of  justice,  all 
the  other  members  of  that  chosen  race,  among  whose 
number  by  his  talent  and  historical  effectiveness  he 
must  be  counted,  are  placed  side  by  side  with  him, 
those  great  prophets  and  heroes  of  Christian  history 
whose  lot  it  also  was  in  continuous  struggle  against  a 
world  of  hindrances  to  assist  to  victory  new  under- 
standing or  a  new  order  of  things :  Paul  and  Athana- 
sius,  Bernard  of  Clairvaux  and  Savonarola,  Calvin 
and  John  Knox,  Cromwell  and  Bismarck.  All  these 
men,  exactly  like  Luther,  inclined  to  explosions  of 
passion  and  to  a  certain  intolerance  of  the  opinion  of 
others,  and  with  all  of  them  this  hyper-irritability  is 
explained  by  the  tremendous  tension  of  their  emo- 
tional life  resulting  from  the  exclusive  devotion  to  a 
purpose  which  could  only  be  achieved  by  dint  of  con- 
tinual wrestling  with  hostile  powers. 

Only  one  family  characteristic  of  this  august  race 
which  was,  for  instance,  particularly  strongly  devel- 
oped in  Bismarck:  The  often  rather  brutal  lack  of 
consideration  toward  persons  about  them,  seems  not 
to  have  been  so  sharply  expressed  in  Luther.  But  it 
was  present,  nevertheless.  This  is  sufficiently  evi- 
denced by  the  energetic  manner  in  which  he  tries  to 
compel  Catharine  von  Bora  against  her  will  to  marry 
Pastor  Glatz,  and  the  tenacity  with  which  he  at- 
tempted to  force  Melanchthon  into  the  theological 
faculty.  Luckily  Catharine  was  herself  a  very  forceful 


PERSONAL  HABITS  AND  CHARACTER  245 

nature.  She  not  only  opposed  him,  she  also  under- 
stood later  on  so  nobly  and  firmly  to  maintain  her 
ground  as  Doctoress  in  the  Black  Cloister  that  half 
in  jest,  half  in  admiration  Luther  referred  to  her  not 
only  as  his  "Kette"  (=Chain — Katie)  but  also  as  his 
"Master  Katie." 

Though  Melanchthon  also  possessed  the  courage  of 
passive  resistance  when  the  imputations  of  Luther 
became  too  exacting,  he  never  once  found  the  courage 
to  openly  challenge  the  mighty  Doctor.  On  the  con- 
trary, he  purposely  avoided  any  discussion  of  the  the- 
ological differences  which  separated  him  from  the 
aging  "Pericles,"  kept  his  peace,  was  pliant  and  sub- 
missive like  a  timid  pupil  who  is  at  all  times  in  fear 
of  a  blow  from  the  teacher's  rod.  No  wonder,  there- 
fore, that  his  life  by  the  side  of  the  master  whom  in 
spite  of  all  he  heartily  revered,  finally  seemed  to  him 
downright  slavery,  and  that  he  breathed  as  one  liber- 
ated when  the  powerful  dark  eyes  which  had  made  him 
tremble  had  closed  forever.  But  the  blame  for  this  mar- 
tyrdom rests  not  with  Luther  but  with  Melanchthon 
himself.  Magister  Philippus  himself  confessed  that 
he  was  by  nature  somewhat  subservient  and  behaved 
like  a  slave.  One  who  has  such  tendencies,  however, 
must,  if  he  is  chosen  as  the  helpmate  of  one  greater 
than  he,  either  wholly  give  up  any  pretensions  at  in- 
dependence, or  he  must  in  time  make  his  escape  from 
the  oppressively  rare  atmosphere  in  the  heights  where 
genius  thrives  to  the  plains  where  the  great  herd 
grazes  in  comfort.  It  is  truly  tragic  that  the  timid 
Magister  Philippus  could  not  make  up  his  mind  to 
either  course. 


246  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

Even  more  tragic  after  all  is  the  fate  of  Luther. 
Already  many  of  those  who  had  worked  with  him  and 
fought  by  his  side  since  the  opening  of  the  year  1522 
had  turned  away  from  Luther  to  become  his  most  bit- 
ter enemies,  first,  Thomas  Miinzer  and  Karlstadt, 
then  Balthasar  Hubmaier,  Zwingli,  Oecolampadius, 
Schwenckf  eld  and  Sebastian  Franck.  Now  at  the  end 
of  his  days  he  also  lost  spiritual  contact  with  the  most 
gifted  and  oldest  of  his  personal  pupils  without  find- 
ing a  new  friend  who  might  supply  what  he  now 
lacked,  namely,  the  truly  fruitful  intimate  intercourse 
with  minds  at  least  in  a  measure  his  equal.  For  the 
greatest  of  his  spiritual  sons,  who  seemed  more  than 
any  other  destined  to  supplement  him,  John  Calvin, 
in  spite  of  a  cordial  admiration  for  him,  ever  remained 
strange'  to  Luther.  And  though  among  the  loyal 
group  which  swore  by  him  there  were  many  excellent 
and  learned  men  of  strong  character,  there  was  not 
one  who  had  the  gift  of  overcoming  the  one-sidedness 
of  the  master,  and  thereby  to  regain  for  Lutheranism 
the  leadership  of  the  Evangehcal  movement. 


CHAPTER  VIII. 

The  Background  of  Luther's  Life  and  Religion. 

T  UTHER  wrote  several  thousand  books  and  book- 
■*-'  lets.  All  of  them,  however,  more  or  less  bear 
the  character  of  occasional  pamphlets.  Not  one  pro- 
vides a  complete  much  less  a  systematic  survey  even 
of  his  religious  and  theological  ideas,  let  alone  a  clear 
presentation  of  all  the  conclusions  he  derived  from 
these  for  the  ordering  of  personal  and  communal  life. 
Not  a  single  one  furnishes  a  clear  view  of  the  premises 
regarding  the  theory  of  knowledge  with  which  he 
starts  out,  nor  of  the  fundamental  tenets  and  prac- 
tical ideas  which  determine  his  judgments  on  eco- 
nomic, social,  political  and  pedagogical  problems. 

It  was  not  Luther  but  Melanchthon  who  first  un- 
dertook the  obvious  task  of  briefly  summarizing  the 
basic  ideas  of  the  Evangelical  message.  Considering 
that  it  is  the  first  attempt  of  its  kind  this  survey  is 
unquestionably  a  splendid  achievement.  Neverthe- 
less, the  systematist  finds  in  it  much,  indeed  very 
much,  that  is  faulty.  To  Luther,  however,  it  seemed 
wholly  adequate,  indeed,  it  was  in  his  eyes  an  unsur- 
passable classic,  canonic  achievement,  transcending  all 
his  own  works  in  value  and  usefulness  for  the  public. 
This  is  proof  sufficient  that  his  demands  in  this  respect 
were  not  very  exacting.  It  also  shows  that  he  by  no 
means  regarded  *'the  fine  coiffure  of  the  system"  as  a 
247 


248  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

superfluous  decoration,  but  quite  to  the  contrary  as  an 
indispensable  requisite  of  theological  thinking.  It 
further  indicates  that  only  because  he  felt  unequal  to 
the  task  he  refrained  from  personally  shouldering  this 
useful  and  necessary  burden. 

In  truth,  Luther  appeared  to  be  much  less  fitted  for 
just  such  work  than  the  little  Magister  Philippus  be- 
cause of  the  very  peculiarity  of  his  early  training.  As 
a  pupil  of  the  "Moderns"  he  had  learned  to  think  and 
criticize,  but  he  had  never  been  trained  to  pay  atten- 
tion to  the  connection  between  religious  and  theo- 
logical concepts,  to  organize  and  bring  them  into  rela- 
tion with  one  another,  or  even  merely  to  collate  them. 
Indeed,  whatever  inclination  of  this  kind  he  may  have 
had  had  been  driven  out  of  him  in  his  youth  by  the 
purely  critical  methods  of  the  Moderns,  which  dis- 
solved the  dogmas  of  the  Church  into  innimierable  in- 
dividual problems. 

To  be  sure,  the  claim  has  recently  been  made  that 
the  traditional  verdict  on  the  unsystematic  character 
of  his  thinking  does  not  comport  with  the  facts.  It 
is  said  that  though  he  did  not  start  out  with  the  inten- 
tion of  formulating  a  system  he,  nevertheless,  did  pos- 
sess one,  and  at  that  a  system  "which  in  characteristic 
doctrines  is  distinctly  noteworthy  for  its  strict  logical 
consistency."  Furthermore,  it  is  asserted  that  this 
system  is  in  closest  relation  to  that  of  the  Moderns, 
for  the  idea,  they  say,  which  must  be  regarded  as  the 
organizing  principle  of  his  theological  thinking,  the 
idea  of  the  veracity  of  God,  is  derived  from  Okkam. 
To  men  holding  this  view  the  difference  between  Lu- 


BACKGROUND  OF  LIFE  AND  RELIGION  249 

ther  and  Okkam  consists  merely  in  this  that  the  latter, 
standing  on  the  veracity  of  God,  demands  absolute 
submission  to  all  utterances  and  teachings  of  Holy 
Writ,  while  Luther,  following  Augustine,  is  content  to 
designate  the  clear  and  distinct  statements  of  the  Bible 
as  the  unquestionably  trustworthy  revelations  of  the 
veracious  God. 

However,  is  it  really  possible  to  derive  even  the 
fundamental  concepts  of  Luther's  theology  in  a  clear- 
cut  manner  from  this  idea?  No ;  at  least  not  the  basic 
tenet  upon  which  he  himself  always  looked  as  his 
fundamental  article,  the  article  on  justification.  This 
could  never  have  assumed  such  a  singular  importance 
for  him  had  he  always  consistently  followed  in  his  the- 
ological speculation  this  purely  formal  principle  be- 
fore which  all  clear  and  definite  passages  of  the  Old 
and  the  New  Testament  are  altogether  equal  in  value 
and  importance,  whether  they  treat  merely  of  the 
waters  that  were  above  the  firmament  of  heaven,  or  of 
salvation  through  Christ.  Besides,  he  really  did  not 
arrive  at  this  article  through  this  principle  at  all.  On 
the  contrary,  he  did  not  gain  his  peculiar  doctrine  on 
Scriptures  until,  through  "divine  inspiration,"  the  sig- 
nificance of  the  texts  about  the  righteousness  of  God 
had  become  clear  to  him.  This  result  is  not  nullified 
by  the  fact  that  Luther  personally  at  times  termed 
"justification"  an  effect  of  the  veracity  of  God,  inas- 
much as  in  this  connection  the  "veracity  of  God"  re- 
fers to  nothing  more  than  the  faithfulness  and  relia- 
bility with  which  God  fulfills  his  promise. 

The  Reformer,  therefore,   did  not  conceive  the 


250  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

veracity  of  God  with  absolute  clearness  and  singleness 
of  meaning,  nor  did  it  completely  dominate  his  theo- 
logical speculation.  Instead  of  continually  operating 
with  one  principle  or  general  concept  Luther  is  actu- 
ally always  using  two.  However,  the  determining  one 
for  him  was  always  the  idea  of  justification.  Solely 
in  his  writings  on  the  eucharist,  in  which  he  defends  an 
old  Scholastic  view  of  the  Okkamists,  altogether  in 
the  style  of  Okkam,  does  the  concept  of  the  veracity 
of  God  stand  in  the  foreground.  However,  important 
though  it  may  be  for  the  understanding  of  these  writ- 
ings to  keep  this  in  mind,  it  would  nevertheless  be  a 
hazardous  undertaking  to  make  just  these  treatises 
the  basis  for  a  reconstruction  of  his  theology.  All 
would  be  harmonious  and  in  order,  notwithstanding, 
if  Luther  had  carefully  balanced  these  two  concepts. 
But  he  never  even  made  an  attempt  to  do  that. 

Consequently,  we  are,  even  with  the  best  of  inten- 
tions, unable  to  discover  a  strict  consistency  in  his  sys- 
tem, indeed,  we  can  in  no  way  forcibly  bind  his  views 
together  into  a  logical  structure.  Despite  all  en- 
deavors of  this  kind  the  gulf  remains  between  the  two 
circles  of  doctrine  which  he  developed :  The  dogma  of 
justification  in  which  his  new  religious  thoughts  are 
presented,  and  the  dogma  of  the  sacraments  in  which 
in  many  respects  he  is  merely  carrying  on  the  Ok- 
kamistic  view.  In  fact,  while  other  thinkers  in  later 
years,  as  a  rule,  try  to  adjust  the  inconsistencies  in 
their  system,  Luther,  as  a  result  of  the  conflict  about 
the  eucharist,  was  induced  to  bring  out  even  more 
sharply  the  contradiction  between  the  two  phases  of 


BACKGROUND  OF  LIFE  AND  RELIGION  251 

his  teaching,  so  that  it  is  much  more  apparent  in  his 
later  writings  than  in  the  publications  of  the  year 
1520-21,  or  especially  in  the  oldest  classic  presenta- 
tion of  his  doctrine,  Melanchthon's  Basic  Theological 
Truths  of  the  year  1521. 

Luther's  matured  point  of  view,  therefore,  even  if 
one  pays  attention  only  to  the  "characteristic  doc- 
trines," is  like  unto  a  building  with  a  peculiar  mixture 
of  architectural  styles.  Moreover,  if  one  purposely 
seeks  out  inconsistencies,  a  pleasure  Sebastian  Franck 
allowed  himself  as  early  as  1531  in  his  "Geschicht- 
bibel,"  it  is  an  easy  matter  to  run  down  a  dozen  or  two 
of  them.  This  is  due  to  the  unconcerned  manner  in 
which  Luther  both  in  polemics  and  sermons  would 
stress  the  one  or  the  other  point,  and  also  to  his  tend- 
ency of  occasionally  giving  free  rein  to  his  penchant 
for  paradoxes.  By  setting  forth  this  fact  one  in  no 
way  impairs  his  greatness  nor  the  world-historical  im- 
portance of  his  teachings ;  on  the  contrary,  only  thus  is 
the  path  to  a  really  fruitful  appreciation  of  his  genius 
laid  open.  For  only  if  we  resolutely  refuse  to  sys- 
tematize his  individual  utterances,  if  we  permit  them 
to  act  upon  ourselves  wholly  without  qualification  or 
dislocation,  in  the  form  in  which  he  put  them  to  paper, 
while  still  hot  and  glowing  from  joy  or  anger,  do  we 
gain  a  full  impression  of  the  inexhaustible  power,  full- 
ness, audacity  and  originality  of  his  intellect. 

Undoubtedly  this  enormous  facility  in  the  produc- 
tion of  ideas  is  most  intimately  related  to  his  lack  of 
system.  The  energetic  endeavor  to  construct  a  closely 
knit  organized  whole  naturally  puts  a  decided  check 


252  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

on  the  inclination  to  give  room  to  new  ideas  and  hence 
also  on  the  ability  of  producing  new  ideas,  in  fact,  it 
gradually  kills  this  faculty,  while  in  the  opposite  case 
the  mind  ever  remains  fresh  for  new  concepts  and 
always  can  give  itself  up  without  restraint  to  the  im- 
pulse of  forming  new  ideas.  We  consequently  do  not 
claim  too  much  when  we  assert  that  the  Reformer's 
lack  of  system  is  a  necessary  outgrowth  of  his  tremen- 
dous intellectual  fertility  and  to  that  extent  also  a 
necessary  prerequisite  of  his  world-historical  activity. 

The  genuine  systematists,  one  need  only  to  think 
of  Calvin,  are  mostly  not  creative  thinkers,  and  vice 
versa  creative  minds,  as  a  rule,  lack  the  capacity  for 
organization.  And  though  this  latter  type  is  not  very 
frequent,  creative  thinkers  are  even  rarer,  especially 
in  the  field  of  religion  and  ethics,  though  for  that  very 
reason  they  always  exert  a  more  powerful  and  abiding 
influence  than  the  systematic  minds.  They  alone 
really  bring  forth  something  new,  release  new  forces 
and  found  new  institutions  of  historical  life,  while  the 
systematists  have  only  the  more  modest  task  of  or- 
ganizing and  concentrating  the  new  forces  and  ideas. 
By  this  process,  to  be  sure,  as  a  rule  their  effect  upon 
contemporary  and  later  civilization  is  materially  in- 
creased, as  the  example  of  Calvin  again  shows. 

Where  the  inclination  and  ability  of  concentrating 
one's  mind  and  shutting  out  new  impressions  is  found 
in  so  small  a  degree  the  development  and  change  which 
the  content  of  knowledge  undergoes  in  the  course  of 
time  naturally  leaves  more  definite  traces  than  in  the 
case  of  born  organizers,  who  immediately  test  out 


BACKGROUND  OF  LIFE  AND  EELIGION  253 

every  new  idea  critically  according  to  the  basic  prin- 
ciples of  their  system.  Hence  childhood,  youth  and 
maturity,  the  heritage  of  the  parental  home,  of  the 
school  and  the  acquisitions  of  later  years  are  in  the 
case  of  such  thinkers  ofttimes  still  recognizable  in  the 
completed  "system"  like  the  year  rings  of  a  tree.  And 
despite  all  changes  which  occurred  meanwhile,  in  spite 
of  the  natural  dying  off  and  the  forcible  elimination 
of  certain  groups  of  ideas,  one  can,  nevertheless,  in  the 
final  complete  product  still  determine  so  accurately 
the  gradual  growth  of  the  intellectual  property  that  it 
is  possible  to  attempt  a  genetic  analysis  of  the  entire 
system  by  pointing  out  the  several  strata  of  which  it 
is  composed. 

Such  an  analysis,  however,  is  in  this  instance  not 
only  useful  but  a  downright  duty.  For,  particularly 
in  the  case  of  Luther,  the  question  has  ever  again  been 
propounded:  What  did  the  Reformer  derive  from  his 
contemporaries,  and  what  did  he  give  them  in  return? 
It  is  true,  the  sixteenth  century  did  not  yet  set  this 
problem,  it  admired  or  hated,  but  it  did  not  analyze. 
All  the  more  eagerly  has  the  nineteenth  century  busied 
itself  with  this  question.  It  no  longer  sees  in  the  great 
individual  a  revelation  either  of  divine  or  diabolic 
powers,  but  merely  a  problem,  and  it  is  prone  to  solve 
this  problem  like  a  mathematical  proposition,  that  is, 
the  great  individual  is  conceived  as  merely  the  sum  or 
product  of  already  existing  energies  in  which  the  law 
on  the  conservation  of  energy  is  verified  also  in  the 
realm  of  intellect. 

This  attitude,  of  course,  easily  leads  scholars  astray 


254  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

into  a  new  mythology.  Concepts,  like  heredity  and 
environment,  which  are  perfectly  justified  in  zoology 
and  botany,  are  employed  for  the  solution  of  phe- 
nomena of  historical  life  without  further  ado,  while  in 
reality  they  frequently  serve  merely  to  obscure  these 
phenomena;  and  when  these  concepts  prove  inade- 
quate it  may  happen  that  scholars  like  Taine,  in  his 
characterization  of  Napoleon,  quickly  affirm  a  case 
of  atavism.  For  all  manner  of  hypotheses  are  per- 
mitted, only  the  words  mystery,  incomprehensible,  rid- 
dle, dare  not  be  mentioned  aloud !  However,  this  point 
of  view  would  not  have  found  so  many  adherents  if  at 
the  bottom  of  it  there  were  not  a  correct  observation, 
the  observation  that  also  the  genius  in  a  certain  sense 
is  a  part  of  the  mass,  and  that  the  mass  in  a  measure 
participates  in  the  achievements  of  the  genius. 

We  have  noticed  how  much  Luther  in  his  manner 
of  speech,  in  his  literary  customs  and  habits  of  life  was 
a  child  of  his  time.  This  recognition  alone  obliges  us 
to  investigate  also  in  how  far  he  was  a  product  of  his 
period  with  respect  to  his  ideas.  There  is  no  lack  of 
introductory  studies  on  this  point,  indeed,  apparently 
the  investigation  as  such  is  already  complete.  When 
Harnack  asserts  that  Luther  was  on  the  periphery  of 
his  existence  an  old-Catholic  mediaeval  phenomenon; 
if  Wundt  declares:  Luther  did  not  give  hmnanity  a 
new  religion  but  a  new  ethical  structure  which,  how- 
ever, is  but  a  reflex  of  the  powerful  lehensgefuehl 
"sense  of  life"  (i,  e.y  appreciation  of  hfe)  of  the  Re- 
naissance;  if  Wernle  sets  down  the  opinion  that  neither 
Luther  nor  Lutheranism  possessed  a  system  of  ethics, 


BACKGROUND  OF  LIFE  AND  RELIGION  255 

and  Troeltsch  adds:  "Primitive  Protestantism  in  its 
essential  features  and  expressions  is  merely  the  trans- 
mutation of  the  mediaeval  idea,"  one  needs  apparently 
only  to  combine  and  add  these  verdicts  and  the  prob- 
lem is  solved,  solved  very  simply  at  that!  The  ex- 
traordinary, incomprehensible  and  original  elements 
in  the  personality  of  the  Reformer  are  thereby  com- 
pletely done  away  with,  the  "prophet"  has  been  de- 
graded to  the  rank  of  a  very  common  human  being. 
Only  one  riddle  is  left  over,  but  this  in  reality  has 
nothing  to  do  with  Luther's  person,  it  concerns  the 
course  of  the  general  development,  it  is  the  question: 
How  comes  it  that  certain  individuals  become  as  it 
were  the  rallying  point  of  the  forces  and  ideas  of  their 
age? 

However,  this  extraordinarily  simple  solution  of  the 
problem  Luther  presupposes  the  solving  of  quite  a 
series  of  difficult  individual  propositions  about  which 
so  far  an  agreement  has  not  been  reached  by  any 
means.  Hence,  to  be  on  the  safe  side  we  will  first 
closely  investigate  these  separate  problems  and  en- 
deavor to  answer  the  relatively  easy  question:  What 
does  the  Reformer  owe  to  his  parental  home  and  to 
the  school,  and  in  how  far  does  he  merely  express 
ideas  and  judgments  which  others  championed  before 
him? 

Let  us,  therefore,  in  the  first  place,  transport  our- 
selves four  hundred  years  into  the  past,  into  the  home 
of  the  miner  Hans  Luther  at  Mansfeld.  Miners  have 
from  of  old  always  been  very  superstitious.  How- 
ever, in  Luther's  home  this  superstition  is  denser  and 


256  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

stronger  than  to-day  in  the  most  out-of-the-way  vil- 
lage in  the  Eifel.  For  here  we  find  added  to  the  su- 
perstition of  the  miner  the  equally  strong  superstition 
of  the  Thuringian  peasant.  The  good  people,  there- 
fore, really  lived  in  continual  fear  of  all  kinds  of 
monsters  and  goblins,  sorcerers  and  witches,  great  and 
small,  wise  and  stupid  devils.  Even  when  a  natural 
explanation  seems  most  obvious,  as,  for  instance,  when 
her  infant  cried  with  especial  lustiness,  the  greatly 
distressed  mother,  Margaret  Luther,  forthwith  sup- 
poses that  the  neighbor  woman  is  a  witch  and  Father 
Hans  does  not  doubt  that  she  is  right  and  that  the 
little  son  must  die  because  he  has  been  bewitched. 

This  firm  belief  in  devils  and  witches  was  trans- 
mitted to  Doctor  Martinus  in  the  same  undiminished 
degree  as  the  inexhaustible  stock  of  popular  sayings 
and  stories,  abuse  and  ridicule,  which  his  father  and 
mother  had  at  their  disposal.  In  fact,  it  was  mate- 
rially increased  during  his  days  at  school  and  his  stay 
in  the  monastery.  Hence  as  a  mature  man  Luther 
never  merely  postulates  the  possible  instance:  "If 
devils  all  the  world  should  fill,"  no,  the  world  to  him 
is  actually  full  of  devils.  These  bad  spirits  are  busy  in 
house  and  yard,  wood  and  field,  about  man  and  in 
man.  In  the  shape  of  a  he-goat  they  infest  woods  and 
swamps,  in  the  form  of  quivering  flames  or  as  dragons 
they  swish  through  the  air,  as  water  sprites  they  draw 
bathers  down  into  the  depths  of  the  rivers.  Also  their 
supreme  master,  Satan,  does  not  disdain  occasionally 
to  appear  in  visible  form.  Men  he  preferably  ap- 
proaches in  the  guise  of  a  beautiful  maiden,  to  women 


BACKGROUND  OF  LIFE  AND  RELIGION  257 

he  reveals  himself  as  a  gay  cavalier  in  a  green  hat  with 
a  blue  plume.  For  the  more  Satan's  "Mother"  hen- 
pecks  him  in  his  "hostelry"  below  the  bolder  he  acts 
on  earth.  It  is  reported  that  he  has  been  seen  also 
in  the  disguise  of  a  gray  monk,  as  hermit,  parish  priest, 
dragon,  calf,  he-goat  and  as  a  horned  gentleman.  Be- 
sides, it  is  very  probable  that  cats,  apes  and  parrots 
and  the  strange  caterpillars  whose  posterior  is  sus- 
piciously decked  out  with  a  little  horn  also  have  a  bit 
of  the  devil  in  them. 

As  a  rule,  however,  these  evil  spirits  move  and  act 
about  and  inside  of  men  unseen,  ever  ready  to  cause 
harm  and  to  murder  his  soul.  At  one  time  they  scare 
the  good  Christian  by  inundations,  at  another  by  ter- 
rible storms,  then  again  they  trouble  him  with  deadly 
epidemics  among  his  flocks  or  by  frightful  plagues. 
Worse  still  is  the  fact  that  they  are  not  afraid  to  enter 
into  human  beings  themselves,  and  to  rob  them  of 
their  reason  or  incite  them  to  evil  deeds.  The  lesser 
devils  lead  man  into  adultery,  avarice,  vain  ambition 
and  suchlike  sins,  the  greater  and  more  dangerous 
ones  seduce  to  melancholy,  unbelief,  despair  and 
heresy.  The  Pope  and  other  enemies  of  the  gospel 
have  in  this  wise  become  altogether  the  tools  of  the 
evil  one.  Hence  it  is  self-evident  that  human  beings 
can  enter  into  a  formal  pact  with  Satan.  In  this  way, 
for  example.  Dr.  Eck,  Joachim  I  of  Brandenburg  and 
the  notorious  Dr.  Faust  of  Kundling,  who  toward  the 
end  of  the  second  decade  of  the  sixteenth  century  was 
active  in  Wittenberg  until  a  warrant  of  arrest  issued 
by  the  Elector  John  forced  him  to  leave,  have  given 


258  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

themselves  over  to  him.  In  fact,  once  even  a  student 
at  Wittenberg  did  this. 

More  frequently  than  men,  however,  women  per- 
mit the  devil  to  befool  them.  Then  they  become 
witches,  "make  cruel  weather,"  paralyze  peoples* 
limbs  by  sudden  fits  of  rheumatic  pain  (Hexen- 
schuss) ,  stop  the  milk  of  cows,  steal  the  wool  from  the 
living  sheep  and  commit  other  shameful  deeds.  Such 
witches  often  pm-sued  also  Doctor  Luther  and  his 
Katie.  Small  wonder,  therefore,  that  the  Doctor  oc- 
casionally threatens  these  impudent  instruments  of 
the  Devil  even  from  the  pulpit,  and  that  he  shares 
completely  the  conmion  view  that  these  women  must 
be  punished  by  death,  though  only  if  they  prove  im- 
pervious to  pastoral  admonition,  and  not  because  of 
the  harm* they  inflict  upon  man  but  because  of  the  per- 
sistent blasphemy  of  which  they  are  guilty.  For  ac- 
cording to  the  prevailing  laws  blasphemy  is  a  crime 
worthy  of  capital  punishment.     (Cf.  page  305  sq.) 

Happily  Luther  knows  exactly  not  only  the  works 
and  the  tools  of  Satan  but  also  his  character  and  that 
of  his  servants.  He  knows  that  the  evil  one  is  a  proud 
spirit,  and  that  least  of  all  he  can  bear  contempt.  Such 
scorn  of  the  devil  Luther,  therefore,  exhibits  again 
and  again,  often  with  decidedly  popular  gestures. 
Fear  of  the  devil  is  altogether  foreign  to  him.  The 
consciousness  of  having  continually  to  fight  with  the 
master  of  this  world,  but  of  always  being  able  to  fell 
him  with  a  single  word,  only  serves  to  increase  the 
Doctor's  joyful  feeling  of  strength.  More  than  any 
other  person  he  confirms  the  statement  of  Goethe: 


BACKGROUND  OF  LIFE  AND  RELIGION  259 

"Superstition  is  the  heritage  of  energetic  and  noble 
natures." 

However,  Luther  believes  that  man  does  not  stand 
alone  in  this  conflict  with  the  evil  spirits.  The  benefi- 
cent spirits,  the  angels  whose  commander  is  St.  Ga- 
briel, come  to  his  aid.  For  just  as  every  human  being, 
so  to  speak,  has  a  private  devil  so  also  everyone  has  his 
guardien  angel.  And  though  Satan  were  closer  to  us 
than  our  shirt,  indeed  closer  than  the  body  itself,  the 
angels  are,  nevertheless,  still  more  powerful  and  wise. 
They  are  consequently  always  able  in  case  of  need  to 
give  man  good  counsel  and  sometimes  in  fact  even  to 
teach  him  the  secrets  of  the  future. 

This  popular  belief  in  devils  and  angels  which  he 
had  imbibed  with  his  mother's  milk  the  Reformer 
tenaciously  retained  during  his  whole  life.  Besides, 
he  ever  clung  to  the  ancient  faith  in  the  evil  omen  of 
comets,  eclipses  of  the  sun  or  moon,  and  was  prone  to 
see  in  human  or  animal  monsters  a  good  or  bad  portent 
hke  all  other  people  of  his  time. 

In  spite  of  all  this,  peculiar  though  such  a  conten- 
tion may  sound,  Luther  impaired  the  reign  of  super- 
stition more  than  any  one  of  his  contemporaries  and 
was  personally  more  enlightened  than  the  majority  of 
the  educated  class  of  that  day,  especially  more  so  than 
the  Italian  free  thinkers  who  have  so  often  been 
praised  as  ideal  enlighteners,  for  instance,  Gemisthos 
Plethon,  Codro  Urceo,  Machiavelli  and  Guicciardini. 
All  the  confused  pseudo-sciences  which  Humanism 
had  once  more  brought  to  honor  and  which  were  as- 
siduously cultivated  even  at  the  Curia,  such  as  astrol- 


260  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

ogy,  alchemy,  geomancy,  chiromantics,  etc.,  Luther 
despised  and  ridiculed  with  all  his  heart,  even  though 
the  good  Magister  Philippus  himself,  as  a  true  Hu- 
manist, could  not  abstain  from  dabbling  a  bit  in  this 
nonsense.  He  also  would  not  hear  of  exorcising 
devils,  a  custom  which  was  very  popular  at  the  time, 
and  of  a  goodly  number  of  other  superstitious  prac- 
tices and  conceptions,  such  as,  for  example,  the  notion 
that  witches  rode  through  the  air  on  brooms  and  were 
able  to  assume  the  forms  of  all  kinds  of  animals,  the 
illusion  that  the  dead  sometimes  came  to  life  again, 
the  belief  in  the  magic  wand,  in  the  magic  effect  of 
love  potions,  in  telling  fortune  from  finger-nails  and 
in  the  magic  mirror.  Furthermore,  Luther  in  his 
earlier  years  actively  fought  and  later  on  partly  abol- 
ished or 'suppressed  very  nearly  all  the  either  absurd 
or  revolting  atropean  customs  which  were  still  in 
vogue  at  birth,  baptism  and  burial,  in  times  of 
plague,  floods  and  conflagrations. 

But  did  Luther's  belief  in  devils  not  grow  increas- 
ingly gloomy,  wild  and  crude  with  his  advancing 
years?  No!  This  view  of  certain  modern  inquisitors 
is  as  profoundly  erroneous  as  the  oft-mentioned  as- 
sertion that  the  belief  in  witches,  which  at  bottom  is 
nothing  more  than  a  survival  of  ancient  Germanic 
paganism,  was  first  naturalized  in  the  Protestant 
world  by  Luther.  We  must  in  this  case  again  beware 
of  ingeniously  isolating  Luther,  that  is,  we  must  not 
view  him  as  a  phenomenon  standing  by  himself  with- 
out reference  to  the  belief  of  his  era.  Further,  we 
must  guard  against  severing  his  thoughts  and  con- 


BACKGROUND  OF  LIFE  AND  RELIGION  261 

cepts  from  their  natural  context,  as  Grisar  does  when 
he  presents  Luther's  views  about  the  devil  and  demons 
altogether  without  regard  for  the  strong  and  joyful 
faith  in  God,  for  which  after  all  these  former  views 
are  merely  the  foil,  and  who  thus  utterly  fails  to  see 
behind  the  superstitious  Luther  the  believing  Luther 
who  did  such  a  great  deal  to  diminish  superstition. 

With  the  same  distinctness  as  the  heritage  of  his  pa- 
ternal home  we  can  detect  also  the  legacy  of  the  school 
in  the  system  of  the  Reformer.  A  number  of  very 
characteristic  proofs  for  this  have  been  cited  above. 
(Cf.  page  62  sq.)  It  will  be  sufficient,  therefore,  to 
note  at  this  point  the  additional  fact  that  the  Re- 
former also,  in  his  political,  social  and  economic  the- 
ories and  proposals  of  reform,  usually  follows  very 
closely  the  Okkamistic  tradition  or  other  mediaeval  au- 
thorities. For  example,  he  follows  Okkam  when  he 
declares  that  the  care  of  the  poor  is  a  task  of  the  secu- 
lar communal  and  territorial  administration,  when  he 
points  out  that  it  is  a  duty  and  privilege  of  the  secular 
power  to  remedy  abuses  in  the  administration  of  pub- 
lic worship.  Further,  the  Okkamists  are  his  guide 
when  he  makes  the  assertion,  which  sounds  so  heretical 
to  modern  ears,  namely,  that  the  secular  government 
is  unquestionably  bound  only  by  natural  law  or  divine 
law,  and  that  it  has  a  right,  indeed  has  the  duty,  under 
certain  circumstances  to  simply  disregard  wi'itten  law. 

Not  from  Okkam  himself,  but,  nevertheless,  de- 
rived from  the  common  mediaeval  tradition  is  in  this 
connection  the  distinction,  self-evident  to  Luther,  be- 
tween written  (positive)   law  on  the  one  hand  and 


262  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

natural  law  on  the  other.  The  same  source  is  responsi- 
ble for  the  view  to  which  he  consistently  adhered  and 
which  held  that  "Christendom"  is  the  great  interna- 
tional organization  of  Christian  society,  which  in  ma- 
terial things  is  ruled  by  the  secular  power,  in  spiritual 
matters  by  the  Word  of  God.  Again,  also,  his  pe- 
culiar division  of  this  Christian  society  into  three  sa- 
cred orders:  the  Teachers  (pastors  and  teachers),  the 
Governors  (secular  lords  and  governmental  bodies) 
and  the  Breadwinners  (peasants,  craftsmen,  mer- 
chants) has  this  same  origin.  To  the  identical  source 
we  may  assign  his  idea  which  conceives  of  the  civic 
calling  as  an  office  in  the  service  of  society,  and  partic- 
ularly the  claim,  which  appears  so  strange  to  our  mod- 
ern feeling  in  this  matter,  that  the  division  of  mankind 
into  governing  and  governed  classes,  and  the  whole 
order  of  society  which  is  based  upon  this  principle,  is 
the  result  of  the  fall  of  man. 

More  mediaeval  still,  to  the  present-day  German, 
seem  his  judgments  on  questions  of  economics  and 
conditions  of  economic  distress.  The  Middle  Ages 
are  distinctly  agrarian  in  tone.  The  craftsman  is  not 
highly  esteemed;  industry  and  trade  are  regarded  as 
improper  means  of  gaining  a  livelihood;  all  money 
transactions  pure  and  simple,  especially  those  in  which 
money  plays  the  role  of  a  productive  factor,  it  utterly 
condemns.  Luther  is  at  bottom  of  the  same  opinion. 
He  frankly  adopts  the  mediaeval  saying:  A  merchant 
can  scarcely  obtain  salvation.  He  stamps  all  import 
trade  as  a  great  evil,  all  money  transactions,  in  as  far 
as  they  aim  at  gain,  he  holds  to  be  unnecessary  and 


BACKGROUND  OF  LIFE  AND  RELIGION  263 

objectionable,  and  he  would  fain  damn  every  puny 
little  money  lender  as  an  unchristian  usurer. 

Even  where  he  follows  no  tradition  or  authority  but 
draws  wholly  upon  his  own  ideas  Luther  is  not  al- 
ways as  absolutely  new  as  it  would  seem  to  the  out- 
sider. In  these  instances  also  he  often  merely  voices 
doubts  and  thoughts  which  had  long  been  discussed 
pubhcly  in  the  "heretical"  communities  and  pro-re- 
form circles  of  the  Middle  Ages.  Plenty  of  parallels 
can  be  adduced  both  from  the  heretical  and  from  the 
Catholic  oppositionary  literature  of  the  Middle  Ages 
on  what  Luther  has  to  say,  for  example,  about  the 
abuses  of  the  papal  regime,  also  on  the  moral  deteri- 
oration of  monasticism,  the  worldliness  of  the  higher 
and  lower  clergy,  the  forced  celibacy  of  the  priests, 
on  indulgences,  the  worship  of  saints,  rehcs  and 
images,  the  ecclesiastical  system  of  enforced  fasts,  the 
excessive  number  of  festal  days  and  similar  out- 
growths of  the  Catholic  system.  Taken  as  a  whole, 
therefore,  the  treatise  in  which  especially  he  criticizes 
the  external  abuses  in  Catholicism,  the  "Address  to 
the  Nobility,"  offers  very  little  that  is  entirely  new. 

Also  in  his  strictures  on  Catholic  dogma  Luther 
had  in  many  particulars  been  preceded  by  the  Lom- 
bard and  German  Waldenses,  by  the  English  and 
Bohemian  Wiclifites.  It  will  suffice  to  call  attention 
merely  to  the  doctrines  on  purgatory,  transubstan- 
tiation,  confirmation  and  extreme  unction.  Even  the 
assertion  that  the  Pope  is  the  Antichrist  and  Rome 
the  Babylon  of  the  Apocalypse  of  St.  John  we  meet 
earlier  with  the  adherents  of  Peter  Waldo  in  Lom- 


264    LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

bardy.  Hence,  the  truly  new  elements  in  Luther's 
criticisms  of  the  Catholic  system  are  apparently  only 
three  in  number :  The  strictures  on  the  Catholic  view 
of  sin  and  grace,  the  attack  on  the  Church's  concept  of 
the  sacraments  and  on  its  view  of  the  religious  value 
of  an  ascetic  life. 

There  is,  however,  no  dearth  of  scholars  who  will 
not  concede  even  this  much  without  reservation.  In- 
deed, some  would  not  even  recognize  him  as  the  first 
discoverer  of  the  positive  ideas  and  ideals  which  he 
always  uses  as  a  starting  point  in  his  criticism.  And 
it  does  seem  as  though  a  number  of  facts  justified 
this  view.  The  extraordinary  rapidity  with  which 
the  burgher  class  joins  the  Evangelical  movement, 
the  wholesale  accession  of  the  Humanists  to  the 
Lutheran  party,  the  erroneous  opinion,  at  first  shared 
by  so  many  of  the  educated  and  partially  educated, 
that  Luther  was  merely  the  perfector,  or  simply  the 
fellow  combatant  of  Erasmus  of  Rotterdam,  all  this 
naturally  leads  to  the  question :  Did  not  the  new  in  the 
Reformer,  at  bottom,  consist  only  in  the  fact  that  he 
expressed  in  an  effective  form  the  knowledge  and  the 
demands  which  had  long  passed  current  among  the 
German  burgher  class  and  in  the  circles  of  the  par- 
tisans of  Humanistic  reform? 

It  is  claimed,  for  instance,  that  Luther  was  the  first 
to  once  more  bring  to  honor  the  Apostle  Paul  and  to 
revive  Paulinism.  But  previously  the  Humanist 
Marsilio  Ficino,  of  Florence,  and  his  pupils  John 
Colet  and  Jacob  Lefevre  d'Etaples  had  given  out  the 
watchword ;  Back  to  Paul  |   Moreover,  not  Luther  but 


BACKGROUND  OF  LIFE  AND  EELIGION  265 

Lefevre  published  the  fii-st  commentary  based  upon 
the  original  text,  and  first  employed  Pauline  concepts 
for  the  purpose  of  criticizing  the  piety  of  the  day. 

It  is  further  asserted  that  before  Luther  no  one 
emphasized  that  there  is  but  one  religious  authority 
for  a  Christian :  Christ,  or  the  Bible  as  far  as  it  teaches 
Christ's  views.  But  quite  a  while  before  Luther, 
Erasmus  of  Rotterdam  had  expressed  the  same 
opinion  very  vigorously  and  had  earnestly  demanded 
the  return  to  the  simple  doctrines  of  Christ,  a  reform 
of  theology,  and,  more  significantly  still,  also  the  re- 
casting of  practical  piety  after  the  model  of  Christ's 
theology.  The  same  Humanist  further  clearly  recog- 
nized that  a  reform  of  this  sort  could  be  successful 
only  if  the  simple  teachings  of  Christ,  which  hke  the 
sun  were  intended  to  bring  light  to  all,  were  made  ac- 
cessible to  mankind  as  a  whole.  Pursuant  to  this  idea 
Erasmus,  as  early  as  1516,  in  the  admonitory  preface 
to  the  first  edition  of  the  New  Testament  emphatically 
developed  the  concept  which  sounds  distinctly  Lu- 
theran, namely,  the  tenet  that  the  Bible  ought  to  be 
translated  into  all  popular  tongues  and  spread  in 
every  language,  so  that  man  and  woman,  young  and 
old,  nobles  and  commons,  might  read  the  gospels  and 
the  Pauline  letters,  and  in  the  future  the  peasant  in 
the  field,  the  workman  in  the  shop,  the  traveler  upon 
the  high  road  might  pass  the  time  with  passages  from 
Scriptures  and  with  hymns. 

Lastly,  some  insist  that  Luther  was  the  first  person 
to  overcome  the  external,  legalistic  morality  of  the 
Middle  Ages,  who  denied  monasticism  the  right  of  ex- 


266  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

istence,  who  first  pointed  to  the  family  and  com- 
munity, the  state  and  the  civil  occupation  as  the  nor- 
mal sphere  for  the  fulfillment  of  man's  moral  duty. 
But  apparently  Erasmus  had  preceded  him  also  in 
these  reforms.  As  early  as  1502  in  his  famous  edifica- 
tory  treatise,  the  Handbook  of  the  Christian  Soldier, 
he  ever  again  points  from  the  good  works  of  the 
Church  without  expressly  condemning  them  to  that 
most  difficult  part  of  the  law,  the  purification  and 
sanctification  of  the  mind.  At  the  same  time  Erasmus 
expressly  repudiates  the  customary  distinction  be- 
tween the  duties  of  monks  and  of  lay  Christians,  and 
further,  presents  Christ  in  an  impressive  manner  as 
the  prototype  and  example  for  every  human  being. 

However,  Erasmus  is  by  no  means  the  sole  witness 
to  the  £act  that  at  the  very  beginning  of  the  sixteenth 
century  a  change  in  the  moral  point  of  view  is  in  prog- 
ress. In  the  numerous  pamphlets,  denunciatory 
poems  and  apocalypses  which  preceded  the  Reforma- 
tion, is  revealed  not  only  an  ofttimes  terrible  hatred 
of  the  lazy  priests  and  monks,  but  also  occasionally 
an  exuberant  valuation  of  the  pious,  faithful  layman 
and  laborer,  i.  e.,  manual  laborer.  Indeed,  "the 
laborer"  is  essentially  the  pet  figure  of  this  litera- 
ture, his  doings  are  explicitly  praised  as  worship 
of  God,  the  sweat  of  his  brow  thought  to  be  as 
sacred  and  healing  as  the  blood  of  the  martyrs.  Noth- 
ing characterizes  the  strength  and  the  wide  diffusion 
of  this  sentiment  so  much  as  the  fact  that  even  mo- 
nastic preachers  hke  the  Leipzig  Dominican  Marcus 
von  AVeida  made  concessions  to  iti 


BACKGROUND  OF  LIFE  AND  RELIGION  267 

Linked  with  the  high  estimate  of  the  laborer  we  oc- 
casionally find  an  almost  fanatical  veneration  of  the 
"pious  married  folk."  Thus,  for  example,  the  author  of 
the  Apocalypse  of  St.  Michael  declares  that  wedlock 
is  the  sacrament  of  sacraments,  and  requests  pious 
married  people  to  join  in  a  fraternity  of  St.  Michael  in 
order  to  reform  Church  and  Empire,  while,  on  the  other 
hand,  he  unqualifiedly  condemns  monastic  life  in  all 
its  forms.  Here  and  there  we  also  begin  to  hear  open, 
protests  against  the  ascetic  ideal.  When  about  1494 
several  distinguished  citizens  of  Strassburg  entered 
the  Carthusian  order,  a  number  of  "fools,"  as  the  pious 
Sebastian  Brant  complains,  did  not  hesitate  to  assert : 
"God  has  not  created  us  in  order  that  we  become 
monks  or  priests  and  particularly  not  that  we  should 
flee  the  world:  .  .  .  It  is  not  God's  will  that  one 
should  renounce  the  world."  Such  opposition  cer- 
tainly was  not  frequent,  but  the  feeling  revealed 
therein  already  existed  in  wide  strata  of  the  popula- 
tion when  Luther  appeared  before  the  public.  And 
even  where  the  world-renouncing  attitude  still  domi- 
nated the  soul,  people  frequently  had  lost  all  sympa- 
thy for  monastic  asceticism.  In  fact,  as  the  Anabap- 
tist movement  later  shows,  they  demanded  the 
formation  of  world-renouncing  communities  after  the 
pattern  of  the  early  Christians  or  the  Taborites. 

It  would  appear  from  all  this  as  though  Luther's 
message  in  truth  contained  no  new  or  original  ele- 
ments, as  though  Erasmus  had  not  been  mistaken 
when  he  believed  that  the  Wittenberg  monk  had 
ruined  his  whole  reformation  by  liis  rude  interference. 


268  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

The  criticism  and  the  hterary  propaganda  of  the 
Christian  Humanists,  the  mighty  stirring  up  of  the 
spirits  would,  as  it  seems,  have  led  automatically  to  a 
reformation,  indeed,  would  have  hrought  on  a  reform 
in  keeping  with  the  wishes  of  Erasmus  without  any 
"tumult." 

There  are,  in  fact,  still  Erasmians  who  faithfully 
repeat  this  verdict  of  the  old  chieftain  of  the  Hu- 
manists. Anyone,  however,  who  does  not  view  the 
history  of  the  world  from  out  of  the  perspective  of 
his  study  certainly  will  find  this  assertion  just  as 
clever  as  the  claim  that  the  Napoleonic  Empire  would 
of  necessity  have  come  about  even  without  Napoleon, 
and  the  unity  of  Germany  been  achieved  without  Bis- 
marck. Critics  and  rhetoricians  like  Erasmus,  fa- 
natics like  his  counterpart,  the  author  of  the  Apoca- 
lypse of  St.  Michael,  may  call  forth  and  strengthen  a 
world-historical  movement,  but  they  can  never  create 
a  new  order  of  things.  This  can  be  done  alone  by  an 
heroic  will  which  calmly  and  resolutely  takes  up  the 
struggle  with  the  forces  of  the  old  order  of  things  and, 
by  exerting  to  the  full  all  the  powers  of  intellect  and 
soul,  carries  it  through  to  the  final  end.  The  posses- 
sion of  such  an  heroic  will,  this  most  rare  and  most 
mighty  of  the  creative  forces  of  history,  therefore,  can 
certainly  not  be  denied  to  Luther. 

But  is  it  true  that  besides  this  heroic  will  Luther 
possessed  no  characteristics  which  place  him  ahead  of 
Erasmus  and  other  similar  partisans  of  reform?  Is 
he  really  as  a  thinker  nothing  more  than  a  sharp-eared 
and  clever  interpreter  of  the  ideas  of  his  time,  only 


BACKGROUND  OF  LIFE  AND  RELIGION  269 

the  speaking  trumpet  through  which  the  soft  murmur 
coursing  through  the  land  now  gathered  into  one 
mighty  wave  of  sound  and  finally  made  itself  heard? 
Is  Luther  merely  the  "prophet"  who  serves  the  spirit 
of  the  day  as  Aaron  of  old  aided  the  slow-tongued 
Moses,  in  that  he,  so  to  speak,  snatched  the  word  from 
the  tongues  of  the  millions? 

A  brief  examination  of  Erasmus  and  his  prede- 
cessors as  well  as  of  the  spokesmen  of  the  popular 
opposition,  for  example,  the  author  of  the  Apocalypse 
of  St.  Michael,  will  suffice  to  elicit  the  correct  answer. 
It  is  true,  Ficino,  Colet,  Lefevre,  Erasmus  and  his 
numerous  sympathizers  did  enthuse  over  Paul  in  the 
most  extravagant  terms.  However,  not  even  the  most 
Christian  of  these  Christian  Humanists,  Lefevre, 
rightly  understood  the  great  Apostle,  as  Luther  cor- 
rectly remarked  as  early  as  the  nineteenth  of  October, 
1516.  Much  less  did  the  wise  Erasmus  comprehend 
him.  The  first  reformatory  declaration  after  all  which 
does  Paul  complete  justice,  if  not  in  the  letter  at  least 
in  the  spirit,  is  Luther's  lecture  of  Romans  of  the  year 
1515-16,  which  was  long  lost  and  forgotten. 

Since  these  Humanists  failed  to  understand  Paul 
they  were  likewise  unable  to  appreciate  the  other  rep- 
resentatives of  the  primitive  Christian  faith.  What 
Erasmus,  for  example,  praises  as  the  philosophy  of 
Christ  with  a  great  show  of  fine  words,  is  not  the 
Christianity  of  the  New  Testament,  much  less  the 
"Christianity  of  Christ."  It  is  merely  a  "Moralism" 
trimmed  with  Christian  elements  after  the  manner  of 
Minucius  Felix  and  other  ancient  Catholic  apologists. 


270  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

for  the  basic  ideas  of  which  the  same  authorities  must 
be  held  responsible  which  were  followed  by  Minucius, 
namely,  Cicero  and  Seneca. 

What,  according  to  Erasmus,  were  in  the  ultimate 
analysis  the  constituent  parts  of  the  "philosophy"  or 
the  "theology  of  Christ"?  The  new  law,  that  is,  as- 
cetic morality,  the  belief  in  Providence,  and  the  belief 
in  a  retribution  in  after  life.  Solely  in  this  narrow 
moralizing  circle  of  ideas  does  the  great  writer  move 
with  that  calm  assurance  and  confidence  which  per- 
sonal conviction  imparts.  As  soon  as  he  ventures  be- 
yond these  Erasmus  begins  to  vacillate  between 
skepticism  and  traditional  faith,  a  striking  proof  of 
how  little  all  the  ideas  lying  outside  of  this  sphere 
mean  for  his  own  inner  life.  If  we  keep  this  in  mind 
we  can  understand  why  Erasmians  like  Zwingli  and 
Capito,  for  example,  later  join  the  Evangelical  move- 
ment, or  why  others  like  Erasmus  himself,  Juhus 
Pflug,  Gropper  and  Witzel  more  or  less  definitely 
offered  their  services  to  the  Catholic  Reformation. 
The  meager  leligious  rations  upon  which  they  sub- 
sisted might  be  very  profitably  employed  for  the  criti- 
cism of  popular  religion  and  of  the  then  immensely 
complicated  theology  of  the  Church;  for  a  time  also 
they  might  serve  the  educated  classes,  who  began  to 
feel  more  and  more  homeless  in  the  Church,  as  a  sub- 
stitute for  the  seriously  felt  want  of  simple  and  clear 
religious  ideas  in  the  public  worship  of  the  declining 
Middle  Ages,  but  they  were  much  too  general  and 
feeble  to  permanently  satisfy  religious  needs.  They 
would  inevitably  loose  their  influence  over  the  spirits 


BACKGROUND  OF  LIFE  AND  RELIGION  271 

as  soon  as  they  were  confronted  with  an  inwardly 
more  powerful  and  richer  conviction,  be  that  Luther's 
"philosophy  of  faith"  or  the  mysticism  of  Loyola. 

Less  matiure  still  than  the  religious  ideas  of  Eras- 
mus appear  his  ethical  concepts  if  we  turn  the  light 
on  them.  To  be  sure,  he  occasionally  protested 
against  the  differentiation  between  lay  and  monastic 
morality,  and  emphatically  urged  that  a  teacher  of 
children  is  more  highly  esteemed  before  God  than  a 
monk,  but  in  spite  of  his  truly  fanatic  hatred  of  mo- 
nasticism,  as  it  stood  revealed  before  his  eyes,  he  never 
thought  of  striking  at  the  root  of  the  tree  and  denying 
that  the  old  ascetic  ideal  had  any  justification  for  its 
existence.  On  the  contrary,  Erasmus  during  his 
whole  life  remained  in  theory  an  ascetic  because  of  his 
dependence  upon  the  eclectic  Stoicism  of  Roman 
philosophy.  Consequently,  he  absolutely  lacks  all 
understanding  of  the  moral  worth  of  the  great  moral 
entities:  marriage,  the  family,  and  the  state,  and  has 
no  clear  conception  of  the  moral  significance  of  voca- 
tional labors.  Instead,  he  loved  to  indulge  in  com- 
munistic ideas  and  fantasies.  However,  even  here 
one  does  not  get  the  impression  that  he  earnestly  be- 
lieves his  own  communistic  views. 

Generally  speaking  one  must  beware  of  taking 
Erasmus  too  seriously.  At  times,  certainly,  he  talks 
in  the  style  of  the  prophet,  but  even  in  that  case  he 
again  and  again  drops  his  solemn  tone  as  soon  as  a 
malicious  witticism  pops  into  his  mind,  for  at  bottom 
he  is  a  skeptic,  scoffer  and  rhetorician.  With  genuine 
and  abiding  enthusiasm  he  labors  alone  for  the  fur- 


272  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

therance  of  linguistic  studies  after  the  ideal  of  the 
Humanists,  for  the  reform  of  the  Latin  style  and 
of  the  learned  curriculum.  In  reality  the  unadul- 
terated optimist,  prudent  man  of  the  world  and  wholly 
unphilosophical  scholar  possesses  no  religious  organ. 
That  despite  all  this  he  felt  himself  specially  called 
upon  to  be  a  religious  reformer,  and  that  he  was  most 
willingly  recognized  as  such  by  his  contemporaries  can 
be  comprehended  only  if  we  make  clear  to  ourselves 
how  strong  and  general  was  the  discontent  prevailing 
especially  in  the  educated  classes  with  the  official  re- 
ligious practice.  Where  such  a  feeling  dominates 
people  are  always  ready  to  see  in  every  critic  a  re- 
former and  willing  to  venerate  as  a  prophet  every 
teacher  of  morality  who,  while  he  does  not  do  away 
with  the  unintelligible  teachings  of  the  Church,  at 
least  pushes  them  aside. 

Much  more  earnest  than  the  great  writer  who 
frankly  confessed  that  there  was  in  his  veins  not  a 
di'op  of  martyr's  blood,  much  more  serious  also  than 
the  other  Christian  Humanists  seem  to  have  been, 
appear  the  spokesmen  of  the  popular  opposition.  As 
their  classic  representatives  we  may  regard  the  anony- 
mous author  of  the  Apocalypse  of  St.  Michael.  Here 
we  meet  a  truly  honest  and  laborious  wrestling  for  a 
new  ethical  point  of  view.  But,  how  exceedingly  con- 
fused, how  indistinct,  how  wild  and  fanatical  withal 
are  all  these  well-meaning  world  uplifters.  More  or 
less  all  of  them  pay  homage  to  the  most  absurd  so- 
cialistic dreams,  refuse  to  recognize  as  real  work  any- 
thing but  hard  manual  labor,  and  all  are  still  in  some 


BACKGROUND  OF  LIFE  AND  RELIGION  273 

manner  or  other  held  in  the  bondage  of  the  ascetic 
ideal  of  the  Church.  Thus,  the  author  of  the  Apoca- 
lypse, for  example,  most  energetically  combats  the 
overestimation  of  fasting,  while  at  the  same  time  he 
still  persists  in  regarding  fasting  as  such  as  a  good 
work.  He  further  looks  upon  ceHbacy  as  a  serious 
crime,  but  deems  the  unmarried  life  of  the  priests  so 
necessary  that  he  recommends  the  most  cruel  measures 
for  safeguarding  this  institution.  Among  other 
things  he  suggests  that  children  of  priests  ought  sim- 
ply to  be  starved  to  death.  Even  the  Strassburg 
"fools,"  who  protested  so  vigorously  against  the  flight 
of  Brant's  friends  into  the  Carthusian  monastery, 
must  not  be  declared  principal  opponents  of  asceti- 
cism without  further  proof  than  the  above-cited  lines 
of  the  old  Humanist. 

In  short,  the  whole  lay  opposition  to  the  ethical 
views  of  the  Church  contents  itself  with  the  mere 
expression  of  sentiment  or  stops  halfway,  as  in  the 
case  of  Erasmus.  Nowhere,  not  in  Italy,  either,  does 
it  lead  to  a  clear  grasp,  let  alone  a  conscious  active 
assertion  of  a  new  ethical  ideal.  For,  the  few  Hu- 
manists who,  like  Lorenzo  Valla,  ridiculed  asceticism 
as  unnatural  nonsense,  or  like  Machiavelli  both  in 
theory  and  practice  overstepped  all  behests  of  moral- 
ity, can  be  looked  upon  as  prophets  of  a  new  ethical 
system  only  on  condition  that  Csesar  Borgia,  Fer- 
rante  of  Naples  and  other  "moraline-free"  tyrants  of 
the  Italy  of  those  days  are  also  allowed  to  count  as 
such.  Certainly  the  majority  of  the  Italian  Human- 
ists were  far  from  harboring  any  conscious  and  prin- 


274  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

cipal  opposition  to  the  ethics  of  the  Church,  even 
though,  in  their  personal  life  they  paid  absolutely  no 
attention  to  it  whatsoever.  Some  of  them,  in  fact,  and 
not  the  least  famous,  like  the  Neoplatonists  of  Flor- 
ence, Leon  Battista  Alberti,  Mantovano,  Vida  and 
Sannazaro  were  Catholics  by  conviction,  and  all  of 
the  great  artists  of  Florence:  Sandro  Botticelli,  Fra 
Bartolommeo,  the  Robbia  brothers  and  Michelan- 
gelo were  avowed  and  unquaHfied  adherents  of  the 
piety  of  Savonarola. 

Thus  the  assertion  that  Luther's  ethics  are  no  more 
than  a  "reflex  of  the  mighty  life-consciousness  of  the 
Renaissance,"  or  a  clever  presentation  of  the  lay 
morality  of  the  period,  is  but  a  striking  proof  of  how 
little  known  at  bottom,  even  at  present,  are  Luther, 
the  so-called  Renaissance,  and  the  temper  of  the  Ger- 
man laity  at  the  end  of  the  Middle  Ages.  For  Luther 
never  was  as  "world  open"  and  alive  to  the  world  as 
many  scholars  incessantly  assume  even  in  our  day ;  also 
the  "sense  of  life"  is  no  general  or  exclusive  character- 
istic of  the  Renaissance,  but  rather  a  phenomenon 
which  we  meet  at  all  times,  and  hence  also  in  the  Mid- 
dle Ages,  within  circumscribed  groups  of  the  educated 
and  ruling  classes. 

If,  then,  Luther  is  not  to  be  credited  with  originality 
no  other  course  remains  open  to  us  than  after  the 
recipe  of  any  philosophical  mythology  to  make  the 
"idea"  or  the  spirit  of  the  time,  or  the  genius  of  the 
German  people,  or  the  joint  will,  or  whatever  else 
we  choose  to  call  that  wholly  unknown  and  invisible 
idol,  responsible  for  the  new  ethical  ideals  of  the  Re- 


BACKGROUND  OF  LIFE  AND  RELIGION  275 

former.  However,  that  would  mean  conjuring  up 
ghosts  for  the  purpose  of  solving  an  historical  prob- 
lem, or  would  be  tantamount  to  an  interpretation  of 
historical  facts  on  the  basis  of  a  mythological  text. 
We  had,  therefore,  better  leave  spirits  and  ghosts, 
even  the  much-admired  genius  of  the  German  people, 
alone  and  be  content  with  simply  setting  forth  the  fact 
that  Luther's  ideal  was  his  own  discovery,  at  the  same 
time,  however,  in  a  measure  the  fulfillment  of  a  tend- 
ency and  desire  long  present  in  the  laity,  though  so 
far  it  had  manifested  itself  very  indistinctly  and  con- 
fusedly. 


CHAPTER  IX. 

Luther  as  the  Prophet  of  a  New  Religious  and 
Ethical  Ideal. 

npHE  considerations  just  mentioned  amply  show 
that  the  Reformer  may  with  justice  be  called  a 
prophet  of  a  new  religious  point  of  view  and  a  creator 
of  a  new  ethical  ideal,  despite  the  fact  that  he  ex- 
hibits traits  of  medi^evalism.  Many  things  passed 
current  as  religion  at  the  time  when  Luther  stepped 
forth:  The  veneration  of  God  in  the  spirit  and  the 
worship  of  the  host,  reverential  consideration  of  the 
life  of  Christ  and  the  cult  of  saints,  relics  and  images, 
the  purification  and  sanctification  of  the  soul  and  the 
most  superficial  fulfillment  of  the  ordinances  of  the 
Church,  humble  self-sacrifice  in  the  interest  of  the 
poor  and  sick,  and  the  wholly  mechanical  completion 
of  all  sorts  of  good  works,  such  as  fasting,  saying  the 
rosary,  pilgrimages,  almsgiving,  founding  of  masses, 
donating  pictures,  candles,  altars,  soul-baths,  entering 
into  an  order  or  a  religious  fraternity,  the  purchase 
and  sale  of  indulgences,  and  untold  others.  Christian 
and  pagan,  sublime  and  mean,  holy  and  unholy,  in- 
deed, altogether,  abstruse  elements  are  found  thrown 
together  in  an  ofttimes  exceedingly  strange  mixture. 
Piety  was  attached  to  so  many  things — acts,  places, 
buildings,  customs,  formulas,  doctrines  and  institu- 
tions— the  religious  point  of  view  so  varicolored  and 
276 


PROPHET  OF  A  NEW  IDEAL  277 

full  of  inconsistencies  that  the  question  as  to  the  es- 
sence of  Christianity  can  for  this  period  scarcely  be 
answered  otherwise  than:  Christianity  is  everything 
the  Church  teaches,  does,  demands  and  tolerates.  For 
just  this  was  the  most  characteristic  feature  of  the 
Christianity  of  the  day  that  the  Church  suffered  the 
most  divergent  kinds  of  religion  within  its  bosom: 
The  fact  that  it  demanded  the  veneration  of  the  sup- 
posed prceputium  Christi  as  well  as  the  veneration  of 
Christ  himself ;  that  it  erected  altars  in  the  same  man- 
ner to  saints,  often  only  in  name  distinguished  from 
the  ancient  pagan  gods,  as  to  the  true  God;  that  it 
granted  a  place  in  the  devotion  of  the  faithful  to  the 
divinity  of  Plato  and  Plotinus  as  well  as  to  the 
"Father  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ." 

Then  Luther  appeared,  and  directly  the  picture  be- 
gan to  change,  wherever  he  found  a  hearing.  The 
saints  toppled  from  their  thrones,  purgatory  sank  into 
the  abyss,  the  god  of  Plato  and  Plotinus  became 
silent.  Thousands  of  altars  vanished,  divine  service, 
in  the  old  sense  stopped  entirely.  Offerings,  masses, 
priests  and  sacraments,  the  Church,  all  external 
means  and  mediators  of  which,  according  to  the  old 
faith,  the  divinity  had  need  in  order  that  it  might  im- 
part to  man  the  forces  of  salvation  were  now  to  be 
valid  no  longer.  Heaven  and  earth,  present  life  and 
future  existence  appeared  altogether  transformed. 

However,  if  Luther  thus  recklessly  with  his  peasant 
ax  assailed  the  simple  polytheism  of  popular  religion, 
the  sublime  worship  of  many  gods  in  the  official  cult 
and  dogma,  and  the  naive  pantheism  of  the  Mystics 


278  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

which  had  so  long  haunted  also  the  theology  of  the 
time,  he  did  this  solely  with  the  purpose  of  giving  light 
and  air  once  more  to  religion  which  threatened  to  die 
of  suffocation  under  the  weight  of  its  ancient  trap- 
pings. 

What  did  Luther  himself  understand  the  term  re- 
ligion to  mean?  Nothing  complex,  but  something 
very  simple,  not  a  thing  which  is  bound  to  external 
means  and  mediators,  but  something  wholly  spiritual, 
internal  and  personal,  not  a  knowing  either,  but  an 
attitude  of  the  heart  which  the  individual  first  expe- 
riences as  a  solace  of  the  conscience.  This  attitude  of 
the  heart  to  begin  with  presupposes  the  recognition  of 
the  truth:  the  greatest  evil  is  guilt,  the  highest  boon 
abolition  of  guilt ;  secondly,  the  experience  which  can 
always  only  be  acquired  personally  by  the  individual : 
that  man  is  freed  from  guilt  alone  if  he  uncondition- 
ally trusts  in  the  Holy  God  who  reveals  himself  in 
Christ  as  a  merciful  Father.  This  experience,  how- 
ever, is  not  materialized  until  this  trust  in  the  form  of 
a  divine  gift  takes  possession  of  the  soul,  since  it  is 
nothing  more  than  the  faith  in  God  as  the  all-govern- 
ing and  all-merciful  Father. 

Thus  in  Luther's  opinion  religion,  the  whole  re- 
ligion, consists  in  seeking  and  finding  God  in  Jesus 
Christ,  who  is  the  mirror  of  his  paternal  heart,  of  lov- 
ing, fearing  and  trusting  in  him  alone  above  all  things, 
attaching  one's  heart  solely  to  him  and  letting  it  repose 
in  him  alone.  But  how  does  man  come  to  Jesus 
Christ?  Luther  rephes:  With  the  help  of  the  Spirit 
of  God  through  whom  God  is  ever  present  and  active 


PROPHET  OF  A  NEW  IDEAL  279 

in  the  world  for  the  purpose  of  gathering  for  himself 
a  people  or  a  church.  The  medium  which  the  Spirit 
employs  for  this  end  is  none  other  than  the  Word  of 
God,  or  the  testimony  of  the  benefactions  of  Christ. 
This  in  turn  confronts  man  in  a  threefold  form: 
orally  in  Christian  preaching,  visibly  in  baptism  and 
the  eucharist,  and  in  written  form  in  the  Bible  as  far  as 
it  teaches  Christianity,  or  speaks  of  the  blessing  of 
Christ. 

Thus  Christianity  as  conceived  by  Luther  is  not 
only  a  spiritual  and  inward  factor  throughout,  but  is, 
in  addition,  thought  of  as  depending  on  a  medium 
which  operates  only  in  a  spiritual  manner — the  Word. 
Moreover,  the  Church  is  not  merely  viewed  as  an  in- 
stitution working  through  purely  spiritual  means,  but 
also  as  an  invisible  realm  governed  by  an  unseen  ruler, 
Christ,  through  the  invisible  means  of  the  Word.  This 
realm  is  only  in  so  far  connected  with  the  visible 
churches  as  they  preach  the  Word  of  God  and  thus  in 
a  sense  serve  as  missionary  institutions  for  the  true 
Church.  For  that  which  in  the  visible  churches  really 
represents  the  Church  is  imperceptible,  while  the  ele- 
ment which  can  be  seen  is  not  the  Church  but  merely 
an  institution  of  human  law  determined  in  its  char- 
acter by  place,  time  and  changing  circumstances. 

The  recognition  that  religion  is  an  attitude  of  the 
soul  which  can  be  awakened  and  nourished  only  by 
spiritual  means  is  Luther's  most  significant  disclosure. 
For  all  his  later  discoveries,  the  abolition  of  the  "extra- 
worldly  asceticism,"  the  destruction  of  the  Catholic 
conception  of  the  mass,  etc.,  are  but  logical  conclu- 


280  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

sions  derived  from  this  first  fundamental  tenet.  Three 
of  these  deductions  came  to  be  especially  important 
for  the  future.  First,  the  knowledge  that  there  is  but 
one  way  of  knowing  God  and  of  entering  into  the 
fellowship  of  God,  namely,  the  way  of  faith.  This 
principle  invalidates  the  whole  previous  mechanism  of 
theology.  At  the  same  time  Neoplatonic  Mysticism 
which  until  then  had  played  such  a  large  part  also  in 
private  edification  lost  its  title  to  existence.  Secondly, 
the  recognition  that  there  is  only  one  way  of  worship- 
ing God,  the  way  of  faith — faith,  in  the  first  place,  in 
the  sense  of  trust  in  the  merciful  love  of  God  for  the 
sinner;  secondly,  as  a  living  and  bold  confidence  in 
that  gracious  guidance  and  providence  of  God  which 
makes  all  things  serve  the  best  interests  of  man.  As  a 
result  of  these  tenets,  the  entire  earlier  divine  worship 
with  its  immense  sacramental  and  hierarchical  appa- 
ratus is  rendered  worthless.  The  service  of  God  which 
remains  is  not,  technically  speaking,  divine  service  any 
longer,  but  only  a  sort  of  pedagogical  contrivance  for 
the  purpose  of  edifying  and  educating  the  congrega- 
tion. Thirdly,  since  religion  is  an  attitude  of  the 
heart,  which  must  and  can  be  proven  by  outward  acts 
at  all  times  and  in  every  condition  of  life,  it  is  an  il- 
lusion to  hold  that  man  must  fly  this  world  and  with- 
draw from  it.  Quite  the  contrary  is  true :  God  placed 
man  into  the  world  for  the  explicit  purpose  that  he 
conquer  the  world  in  the  world,  in  the  position  which 
Providence  allotted  to  him.  Not  the  monastery, 
therefore,  but  the  secular  vocation  is  the  normal  sphere 
for  proving  one's  faith  and  one's  love  for  his  fellow 


PROPHET  OF  A  NEW  IDEAL  281 

man.  Self -evidently,  however,  mere  vocational  loy- 
alty alone  does  not  constitute  fulfillment  of  the  ethical 
ideal.  This  qualification  is  met  only  when  this  loyalty 
springs  from  obedience  to  the  will  of  God  as  revealed 
in  the  natural  order  of  society,  and,  viewing  the  calling 
as  a  means  of  salvation,  if  one  serves  his  neighbor 
in  self-denying  love.  Thereby  not  alone  an  equaliza- 
tion of  the  secular  vocations  with  the  calling  of  the 
monk  is  achieved,  such  as  is  occasionally  already  found 
in  the  German  Mystic,  John  Tauler,  but  world-re- 
nouncing asceticism,  monasticism  as  such  has  been 
overcome  in  principle  and  a  new  ideal  of  personal  con- 
duct in  life  set  up.  For  not  even  the  word  vocation 
had  been  previously  in  use  in  the  sense  which  Luther 
attributed  to  it. 

Thus,  Luther,  by  the  simple  discovery  that  religion 
is  an  attitude  of  the  heart  which  is  spiritual,  and  hence 
cannot  be  aroused  by  any  material  means  and  must  in 
its  operations  not  be  bound  to  anything  material  or 
external,  came  to  be  not  merely  a  reformer  of  religion 
but  also  a  reformer  of  ethics,  for  both  rehgion  and 
ethics  belong  together.  To  be  pious  means  at  the 
same  time  to  be  rehgious  and  also  to  be  good.  Faith 
does  not  only  comfort  the  conscience,  it  also  fills  the 
soul  with  a  joyous  readiness  which  is  the  mother  of  all 
virtue.  As  a  "living,  active"  thing  it  causes  in  man 
the  desire  for  moral  activity  and  remains  as  a  never- 
ceasing  stimulus  constantly  operative  in  all  moral 
action. 

Naturally  the  value  of  these  basic  thoughts  of  Lu- 
theran preaching  has  been  quite  differently  estimated 


282  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

in  the  course  of  time  and  in  accordance  with  the  pre- 
vailing philosophical  or  religious  point  of  view. 
Hence,  also,  very  diverging  opinions  have  been  voiced 
about  the  relation  of  Luther  to  the  Catholic  mediaeval 
system.  We  have  already  learned  to  know  quite  a 
number  of  these  valuations  which  are  in  themselves 
more  characteristic  for  their  originators  than  for  Lu- 
ther. (Cf.  Chap.  I.)  Consequently,  it  will  at  this 
point  suffice  to  discuss  only  the  latest  effort  along  this 
line,  the  criticism  of  the  Lutheran  Reformation  by  E. 
Troeltsch. 

Troeltsch  asserts:  "The  central  religious  idea  of 
Protestantism,  hence  also  that  of  Luther,  is  the  aboh- 
tion  of  the  CathoHc  concept  of  the  sacrament.  This 
idea,  but  this  idea  alone,  is  the  undeniably  modern  ele- 
ment in- Luther's  message.  For  in  its  essential  basic 
principles  and  expressions  early  Protestantism  is  only 
a  recasting  of  the  mediaeval  idea."  This  thesis  must 
in  the  first  place  be  called  into  question  for  reasons  of 
simple  historical  logic.  Instead  of  starting  out  from 
the  positive  f^jndamental  ideas  of  Luther,  Troeltsch 
places  an  undoubtedly  very  noteworthy  negative  con- 
sequence of  these  positive  tenets  in  the  foreground  and 
labels  it  the  central  idea  of  Protestantism.  Had  he 
immediately  considered  the  obvious  question  how 
"Luther  came  to  break  through  the  Catholic  system 
just  at  this  central  point"  he  would  scarcely  have  been 
able  to  avoid  recognizing  that  the  so-called  "central 
idea"  is  a  different  one,  namely,  the  new  notion  of 
religion  which  was  given  doctrinal  expression  in  the 
phrase  "justification  by  faith  alone,"  that  is,  the  con- 


PROPHET  OF  A  NEW  IDEAL  283 

ception  of  "subjective  religion"  as  an  attitude  of  man, 
of  "objective  religion"  as  a  revelation  of  the  sentiment 
of  God.  From  these  premises  the  abolition  of  the 
Catholic  concept  of  the  sacrament,  namely,  the  belief 
that  salvation  is  a  force  which  must  be  conceived  ma- 
terially, and  in  the  communication  of  which  to  man 
God  binds  himself  to  specific  material  mediums,  fol- 
lows automatically. 

Moreover,  historically  this  view  of  the  situation  is 
the  only  justifiable  one.  At  first  Luther  in  1515-16 
gained  his  new  view  of  grace,  faith  and  justification. 
Only  after  this  did  he  in  the  Address  on  the  Baby- 
lonian Captivity  of  the  Church  take  the  offensive 
against  the  Catholic  notion  of  the  sacrament.  It  is 
perfectly  true  that  of  all  his  writings  this  treatise 
made  the  deepest  impression  on  his  contemporaries. 
But  why  did  it  have  such  a  powerful  effect?  Because 
it  struck  the  point  at  which  the  inner  opposition  of 
Luther  to  the  Catholic  system  appeared  outwardly  in 
the  most  striking  fashion. 

Of  greater  moment,  however,  is  the  question :  Must 
we  see  in  Luther's  view  on  grace,  faith  and  justifica- 
tion in  reality  nothing  more  than  a  transformation  of 
the  mediaeval  idea,  or,  as  Troeltsch  expresses  it,  merely 
new  solutions  of  mediaeval  Catholic  problems  ?  Judg- 
ing only  from  the  first  surface  impressions  this  claim 
does  indeed  not  seem  wholly  without  justification.  In 
the  Catholic  system  the  doctrine  of  justification  occu- 
pies the  central  position,  in  the  Protestant  body  of 
dogma  the  same  is  true;  in  Catholicism  the  concepts 
grace,  faith,  good  works  play  an  important  role,  in 


284  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

Protestantism  likewise,  etc.  But  at  the  very  outset 
we  are  struck  by  the  observation  that  Luther  was  not 
at  all  in  need  of  the  concept  of  justification  in  order 
to  give  clear  and  unabridged  expression  to  his  re- 
ligious ideas:  it  does  not  occur  a  single  time  either 
in  his  large  or  small  catechism.  Furthermore,  it  is 
certainly  not  a  negligible  circumstance  that  all  these 
concepts  have  quite  a  different  meaning  in  Luther's 
message  than  in  Catholicism.  They  have  been  com- 
pletely de-catholicized,  de-materialized,  rendered 
more  inward,  more  personal  by  the  new  fundamental 
view  of  religion.  Grace  ceases  for  Luther  to  be  a 
supernatural  force  or  remedy  which  through  the  sacra- 
ments is  poured  into  man,  but  is  nevertheless  meant  to 
bring  about  in  him  spiritual  and  ethical  effects.  It 
has  become  a  "sentiment  of  God,"  which  is  made 
known  in  the  "Word  of  God,"  and  operates  through 
this  medium  as  otherwise  also  an  attitude  is  made 
manifest  and  operates  by  means  of  the  Word.  Justi- 
fication is  not  thought  of  as  a  sort  of  physical  miracle 
by  means  of  which  the  substance  sin  is  suddenly  driven 
out  by  the  supernatural  substance  grace,  but  as  a  spiri- 
tual psychological  miracle  which  is  consummated  in  the 
soul  of  man  wholly  without  material  expedients  and 
which  consists  of  nothing  more  than  the  acquisition  of 
a  new  point  of  view,  namely,  the  unconditional  faith 
in  the  gracious  disposition  of  God.  Faith  is  not  pic- 
tured as  the  external  submission  of  man  to  the  doc- 
trine of  the  Church  which  confronts  him  as  a  body  of 
external  legal  ordinances,  but  again  as  an  attitude,  an 
attitude,  however,  which  does  not  relate  to  something 


PROPHET  OF  A  NEW  IDEAL  285 

external,  be  it  the  Church  or  a  dogma,  but  again  to  an 
attitude,  the  sentiment  of  God. 

Thus,  though  we  find  everywhere  the  same  concepts 
they  have  a  totally  different  meaning.  How  anyone 
can  find  in  this  fact  merely  a  transformation  of  the 
mediseval  idea  is  difficult  to  comprehend.  To  men 
who  employ  the  logic  of  this  world  the  expression 
transformation  is  certainly  in  this  case  meaningless, 
unless  we  understand  form  to  signify  the  essence  of 
the  matter,  or,  to  speak  with  Plato,  the  idea,  and  not 
the  form  in  the  commonly  accepted  sense. 

However,  are  we  not  at  least  justified  in  regarding 
these  teachings  of  the  Reformer  as  new  solutions  of 
mediaeval  Catholic  problems?  Catholic  theologians, 
as  we  have  repeatedly  indicated,  ever  since  the  four- 
teenth century,  manifest  a  desire  to  free  religious 
thought  from  the  bonds  of  ancient  naturalism  and 
substantiaHsm.  Duns  Skotus,  by  conceiving  God 
strictly  as  will  and  person  attempts  to  do  away  with 
the  vestiges  of  naturalistic  pantheism  in  the  concept 
of  God.  Further,  he  endeavors  to  kill  off  naturalism 
in  the  notion  of  sin  and  hereditary  sin  by  viewing  them 
purely  as  manifestations  of  the  will.  Through  his 
doctrine  of  merit  he  is  undermining  also  the  old  con- 
ception of  religion  as  a  private  law  relationship  be- 
tween God  and  man,  and  to  a  certain  degree  even 
endeavors  to  spiritualize  the  idea  of  grace  by  differ- 
entiating between  sacramental  grace  and  justificatory 
grace.  Okkam  and  his  school  faithfully  follow  his 
footsteps.  They  carry  out  the  criticism  of  these  fun- 
damental concepts  of  the  Catholic  system  even  more 


286  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

rigidly,  and  further,  begin  the  attempt  of  uprooting 
the  hierarchical  concept  of  the  Church.  At  the  same 
time,  however,  the  Mystics  commence  ever  more  and 
more  to  push  aside  for  purposes  of  private  edification 
the  hierarchical-cultural  apparatus  of  the  Chm-ch  in 
order  to  make  room  for  an  inward  and  personal  ac- 
quisition of  religion  such  as  the  earlier  Middle  Ages, 
at  least  among  the  laity,  had  not  known. 

While  it  is  true  that  all  these  efforts  did  not  lead 
to  an  abolition  but  only  to  a  disintegration  of  the 
Catholic  structure,  it  is,  notwithstanding,  incontesti- 
ble  that  in  and  with  these  endeavors  tendencies  came 
to  light  which  point  forward,  but  break  through  fully 
only  in  the  message  of  Luther.  Does  this  prove  that 
early  Protestantism  is  in  its  fundamental  character- 
istics merely  a  new  solution  of  mediseval  Catholic 
problems?  By  no  means.  It  only  goes  to  show  that 
already  in  this  period  which,  ever  since  Cellarius,  has 
commonly  been  called  by  the  unfortunate  name  Mid- 
dle Ages,  tendencies  made  themselves  felt  which  by 
and  by  would  necessarily  have  led  to  complete  disin- 
tegration, and  if  consistently  continued  finally  brought 
about  the  utter  collapse  of  the  mediaeval  Catholic  sys- 
tem. Such  tendencies  and  new  ideas,  deadly  for  Ca- 
tholicism, are  indeed  noticeable  at  the  turning  of  the 
thirteenth  and  fourteenth  centuries  almost  simultane- 
ously in  all  fields  of  civilized  life,  so  that  this  period, 
the  era  of  Pope  Boniface  VIII,  can  with  good  cause 
be  designated  as  the  real  turning-point  of  the  ages. 

In  this  period  for  the  first  time,  both  in  the  political 
theories  of  the  French  publicists  and  in  the  political 


PROPHET  OF  A  NEW  IDEAL  287 

practices  of  the  French  monarchy,  the  Augustinian- 
Medigeval  conception  of  the  universal  association  of 
Christian  humanity  is  opposed  by  the  modern  ideal 
of  the  sovereign  national  state  which  laid  claim  not 
only  to  complete  autonomy  but  also  to  unrestricted 
control  over  all  the  fields  of  the  material  and  spiritual 
life  of  its  subjects.  Simultaneously,  with  Duns  Sko- 
tus  and  Okkam,  begins  the  criticism  and  dissolution  of 
the  Scholastic  system,  with  Mysticism  the  neutraliza- 
tion of  the  hierarchical-cultural  apparatus  of  the 
Church  as  far  as  practical  piety  is  concerned.  And 
what  is  equally  noteworthy,  the  landed  and  military 
nobility  more  and  more  recedes  before  the  municipal 
burgher  class  which  everywhere,  also  in  the  sphere  of 
intellectual  life,  seizes  the  leadership. 

All  these  factors,  however,  are  customarily  not  re- 
garded as  specifically  mediaeval  or  CathoHc,  but  rather 
as  significant  symptoms  of  the  dissolution  of  medi- 
aeval culture  and  the  forming  of  a  new  civilization. 
The  Catholic  Church  professed  this  view  of  the  mat- 
ter with  especial  energy  and  very  early.  It  did  not 
dogmatize  the  "diseased"  theology  of  Duns  Skotus 
and  the  Okkamists,  but  the  "healthy"  religious  teach- 
ings of  Thomas  Aquinas.  All  Mysticism  which  tried 
to  emancipate  itself  from  the  Church  it  strictly  dis- 
avowed, the  modern  idea  of  the  state  and  the  imder- 
lying  cultural  ideal  it  condemned,  Conciliarism,  Epis- 
copalism,  Galhcanism,  in  short,  all  the  political,  ec- 
clesiastical and  theological  efforts  at  reform  which  in 
any  way  seemed  to  threaten  the  continued  existence 
of  its  system  it  rebuffed.    And  there  is  no  doubt  that 


288  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

the  Church  from  its  point  of  view  could  not  have  acted 
otherwise.  Had  it  given  way  only  in  a  single  point  to 
these  tendencies  it  would  have  given  up  its  very  self. 

Hence,  though  Luther  in  his  development  pro\es  in 
many  ways  to  have  been  under  the  influence  of  Sko- 
tian  and  Okkamistic  criticism  of  the  existing  dogma 
and  of  the  edificatory  ideas  of  Mysticism,  this  does 
not  by  any  chance  justify  the  assertion  that  his  mes- 
sage was  only  a  new  solution  of  mediseval  Catholic 
problems.  In  the  first  place,  this  criticism  and  these 
edificatory  thoughts  lacked  the  specifically  medieeval 
Catholic  stamp.  Secondly,  Luther  was  under  the  ne- 
cessity of  attaining  the  very  most  fundamental  ideas 
of  his  new  religious  point  of  view:  the  new  concepts 
about  man,  God,  on  the  relation  of  man  to  God,  in  a 
bitter  conflict  with  Okkam  and  Mysticism. 

Though  it  is,  of  course,  true  that  in  this  combat 
Mysticism  materially  aided  him  in  overcoming  Ok- 
kam, while  the  Invincible  Doctor  assisted  him  in  clear- 
ing up  his  relations  to  Mysticism  (page  107  sq.),  yet 
the  net  result  at  which  he  finally  arrived  is,  neverthe- 
less, quite  a  good  deal  more  than  a  mere  crossbreeding 
of  Okkamism  and  Mysticism.  For  in  the  third  place, 
the  problem  which  is  uppermost  in  this  struggle,  the 
question:  How  will  I,  the  individual,  gain  assurance 
of  forgiveness?  was  propounded  neither  by  Okkam 
nor  by  the  Mystics,  nor  can  it  be  arrived  at  from  the 
premises  of  both  by  a  process  of  deduction.  On  the 
contrary,  both  tried  with  all  their  might  to  engender 
and  hold  fast  precisely  that  peculiar  attitude  of  con- 
sciousness and  frame  of  mind  which  Luther  wished 


PROPHET  OF  A  NEW  IDEAL  289 

to  overcome.  In  fact,  they  endeavored  as  far  as  pos- 
sible to  increase  this  disposition,  this  wavering  'twixt 
hope  and  fear;  the  Okkamists  because  under  such 
conditions  the  pious  person  is  more  incHned  to  moral 
effort,  the  Mystics  because  only  thus  can  he  persist  in 
that  perfect  humility  which  accepts  from  God  tran- 
quilly even  eternal  death  and  damnation.  Neither 
can  any  of  the  other  varieties  of  Catholic  piety  attain 
or  grasp  Luther's  problem,  in  fact,  it  is  to  them  even 
as  a  mere  problem  an  impiety  and  wickedness  from 
which  the  truly  pious  man  turns  away  with  disgust. 

Consequently,  if  one  wishes  correctly  to  determine 
the  relationship  of  the  Reformer  to  the  religion  of  the 
Middle  Ages  there  remains  no  other  way  than  to  di- 
rectly invert  the  formula  of  Troeltsch  and  to  state 
that:  Luther's  message  is  the  solution  of  a  new  reh- 
gious  problem  on  the  basis  of  Okkamistic  criticism  of 
the  Catholic  system  and  the  practical  edificatory 
speculations  of  the  late  mediaeval  Mystics. 

However,  Troeltsch  did  not  at  all  reach  his  con- 
clusions by  the  usual  historical  method.  He  built  up 
his  whole  structure  not  from  the  front  but  from  the 
rear.  Instead  of  first  determining  the  content  of  the 
mediaeval  and  the  Lutheran  systems  and  then  com- 
paring the  two,  he  endeavored  before  all  else  to  ascer- 
tain the  difference  existing  between  the  culture  of  the 
present  and  all  preceding  civihzations  of  Christian 
history.  Only  after  that  did  he  pay  closer  atention  to 
the  peculiarities  of  these  older  stages  of  civilization. 
This  method  is  certainly  a  good  one  for  the  purpose 
of  clearly  presenting  certain  characteristic  features  of 


290  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

modern  civilization.  But  these  certain  characteristics 
are  thereby  easily  overaccentuated  and  others  of  per- 
haps equal  importance  are  overlooked.  At  best,  as 
remnants  of  older  epochs  of  culture,  they  acquire  the 
taint  of  illegitimacy  and  are  thus  not  sufficiently  ap- 
preciated in  their  significance  for  the  picture  as  a 
whole.  Above  all,  as  is  invariably  the  case  in  such 
retrospective  treatments  of  history,  present  and  past, 
are  involuntarily  placed  over  against  one  another  from 
the  angle  of  contrast  and  not  from  that  of  develop- 
ment. In  that  way  the  differences  of  the  several  cul- 
tural stages  stand  out  sharply,  while  on  the  other  hand, 
in  viewing  the  steps  of  cultural  growth  in  the  past 
these  differences  are  unwittingly  blurred  and  weak- 
ened and  the  firm  contours  as  far  as  possible  dissolved, 
since  in  this  wise  the  desired  effect  of  contrast  is  more 
easily  obtained.  In  short,  right  in  the  middle  of  the 
process  of  historical  consideration  the  method  of  pro- 
cedure is  changed:  First,  the  antitheses  which  have 
been  noted  are  heightened  and  then  they  are  with  like 
energy  equalized.  It  is  obvious  that  no  faithful  gen- 
eral picture  of  the  period  can  be  gained  in  this  way. 
The  projections  will,  of  necessity,  always  be  somewhat 
obHque,the  perspectives  too  short,  the  lights  sometimes 
too  glaring,  sometimes  too  colorless  even  when  the 
portrayer  takes  pains  to  work  from  nature  as  much 
as  possible,  that  is,  in  this  case,  from  the  sources. 

This  peculiar  "blunder,"  which  is  unavoidable  if 
one  employs  the  method  described  above  has  happened 
to  Troeltsch  precisely  at  the  point  where  in  his  opin- 
ion the  dependence  of  early  Protestantism  on  media- 


PROPHET  OF  A  NEW  IDEAL  291 

val  concepts  is  tangible,  namely,  in  his  estimate  of  the 
reformatory  concept  of  authority,  of  the  ethics  of  the 
Reformation,  and  of  its  view  of  the  Church. 

The  author  explains  that  in  the  manner  of  the  Mid- 
dle Ages,  Luther  takes  for  granted  that  true  religion 
is  known,  that  the  content  of  the  revelation  can  be  as- 
certained exactly  and  must  be  respected  by  everyone 
inasmuch  as  revelation  is  the  self -understood  authority 
for  everybody.  The  only  difference,  according  to 
Troeltsch,  is  that  Luther  refuses  further  to  accept  the 
teaching  Church  as  the  organ  and  vehicle  of  revelation 
and  authority,  and  is  willing  to  recognize  as  such  only 
*'God's  Word,"  the  Bible.  This  is  quite  true.  But,  is 
this  concept  of  authority  in  fact  characteristic  only  of 
the  mediseval  Church  and  early  Protestantism?  No! 
It  is  well  known  in  primitive  Christianity,  because  the 
same  significance  which  for  Luther  attaches  to  the 
clear  and  distinct  passages  of  Holy  Writ,  attaches 
for  the  primitive  Christians  to  the  writings  in  the  He- 
brew or  Alexandrine  Canon,  the  words  of  Christ  and 
the  instructions  of  the  early  Christian  prophets.  They 
are  to  both  absolute  revelation,  absolute  truth  and 
unconditionally  binding  authority. 

We  are,  therefore,  in  this  instance  dealing  not  with 
a  specifically  mediaeval  concept  but  with  a  concept 
common  to  all  Christians.  The  distinctly  mediaeval 
and  Catholic  features,  the  belief  in  the  revealing  func- 
tion of  the  teaching  Church,  and  the  externalization 
and  materialization  of  the  notion  of  authority  which 
flows  from  it,  Luther  has  overcome,  and  really  over- 
come, not  merely  transforined  by  simply  substituting 


292  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

for  the  teaching  Church  the  external  authority  of  the 
letter  of  the  Bible  as  is  still  so  frequently  asserted. 

In  Luther's  opinion  the  Word  of  God  can  become 
revelation  and  authority  actually  only  for  him  in 
whom  it  has  impressively  proved  itself  as  a  Word  of 
God  through  direct  action  of  God  upon  his  soul. 
Whether  this  correction  of  the  old  doctrine  of  au- 
thority is  sufficient  may  well  be  a  matter  of  conten- 
tion. That  the  concept  of  authority  itself,  however, 
is  indispensable  to  Christianity  and  is  also  so  regarded 
by  the  "New  Protestantism"  is  substantiated  at  every 
step  by  the  most  recent  Protestant  theology.  For, 
what  are  the  speculations  about  the  idea  of  Chris- 
tianity and  about  the  historical  Christ  as  medium  of 
the  revelation  and  as  authority  other  than  attempts 
to  spiritualize  the  ancient  doctrine  of  authority  and 
thereby  to  securely  fix  it  for  modern  thought? 

As  a  student  of  ethics  and  sociology  Troeltsch  tends 
to  place  even  greater  emphasis  on  the  second  point,  the 
inner  relationship  of  Lutheran  and  mediseval  Catholic 
ethics.  He  asserts:  Luther's  Christianity  also  is  at 
bottom  still  entirely  ascetic.  In  his  mind  the  Re- 
former differs  from  the  Middle  Ages  only  in  that  he 
demands  not  an  ascetic  attitude  toward  the  external 
world,  but  an  internal  asceticism,  no  more  an  outward 
but  an  inward  fleeing  of  the  world,  that  is,  an  inner 
independence  of  the  heart,  ever  active  in  the  midst  of 
the  world,  from  the  world  and  its  pleasures  and  suf- 
ferings. This  again  is  undoubtedly  true.  The  spiri- 
tual dominion  {imperium  spirtuale)  over  the  world 
which  the  Reformer  praises  in  such  mighty  tones  has 


PROPHET  OF  A  NEW  IDEAL  293 

indeed  no  connection  with  the  modern  cultural  idea. 
It  means  nothing  more  than  the  inner  freedom  and  in- 
dependence from  the  world.  But  it  need  hardly  be 
said  that  the  striving  for  this  inner  independence  is  not 
characteristic  alone  of  the  Middle  Ages  and  the  re- 
formers but  of  the  Christianity  of  all  ages  and  places, 
that  consequently  we  have  here  again  to  deal  with  a 
common  Christian  trait  of  Lutheran  preaching,  and 
not  with  one  that  is  peculiar  to  the  Middle  Ages.  The 
specifically  mediaeval  and  Catholic  phases  Luther  has 
abolished  in  this  case  also.  Again,  it  is  the  "mate- 
rialization of  the  religious  idea,"  the  notion  that  man 
can  only  then  keep  himself  wholly  undefiled  by  the 
world  if  he  also  externally  severs  completely  all  con- 
nection with  the  world,  its  gifts  and  its  tasks,  and  the 
assertion  that  the  ascetic's  supernatural  mode  of  Ufe  is 
the  straight  road  to  salvation. 

The  same  in  every  particular  is  true  of  Luther's  re- 
lation to  the  Catholic  idea  of  the  Church.  The  com- 
mon Christian  feature  of  this  concept,  the  notion  al- 
ready current  in  primitive  Christianity,  that  Christ 
through  his  Spirit  is  always  present  in  the  world  in 
order  to  lead  man  to  faith  and  thereby  to  a  share  in 
his  kingdom,  were  retained  by  the  Reformer.  The 
distinctly  Catholic  elements  in  this  idea,  however,  the 
conviction  that  the  realm  of  Christ  is  visibly  repre- 
sented in  the  hierarchically  constituted  institution  of 
the  Church,  and  the  belief  that  a  fixed  external  organi- 
zation is  essential  for  Christ's  kingdom,  these  again  he 
wholly  set  aside. 

However,  did  Luther  hereby  abolish  completely  all 


294  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

claims  of  the  mediaeval  ecclesiastical  system,  above  all 
the  most  important  one  that  the  Church  was  appointed 
for  the  pm-pose  of  guiding,  regulating  and  ruling  the 
whole  civilized  life  as  supreme  lawgiver,  and  that  it 
was  privileged  as  God's  appointed  administratrix  of 
the  doctrine  and  the  sacraments,  to  permanently  keep 
the  faithful  under  its  tutelage?  Indeed  not;  he  did 
not  radically  break  with  the  Middle  Ages  in  this  re- 
spect either.  He  calmly  retained  the  typically  medi- 
aeval institution  of  the  national  church.  But  in  so 
doing  he  not  only  recast  it  but  really  made  it  into 
something  quite  different.  In  the  first  place  he  at- 
tributed to  it  quite  another  significance  for  religious 
life.  Henceforth,  as  far  as  it  is  an  externally  visible 
legal  institution  it  does  not  count  any  longer  as  an 
institution  of  divine  but  as  one  of  human  law.  It  is, 
furthermore,  not  regarded  as  in  itself  a  medium  of  sal- 
vation but  only  in  as  far  as  it  teaches  Christ.  Above 
all,  it  is  not  any  more  accounted  the  only  and  ex- 
clusive institution  of  salvation  but  must  permit  all 
churches,  religious  institutions  and  associations,  which 
m  any  way  serve  the  cause  of  Christ  to  pass  as  such. 
For  wherever  Christ  is  preached  there  is  Christ's  king- 
dom, or  the  Church  in  the  ideal  sense,  while  the  king- 
dom of  God  is  not  infallibly  present  where  the  ex- 
ternal legal  institution  of  the  Church  is  found. 

Pursuant  to  this  view  the  Reformer  also  formu- 
lated in  a  different  manner  than  the  ^liddle  Ages  the 
task  of  the  national  church.  It  has  no  other  call  than 
that  of  preaching  Christ.  It  has,  therefore,  neither 
the  right  nor  the  duty  to  order  also  the  physical  life 


PROPHET  OF  A  NEW  IDEAL  295 

of  man,  nor  has  it  any  occasion  to  hold  mankind  in 
guardianship  through  laws  and  prescriptions  as 
though  man  were  not  able  to  attend  to  this  himself 
with  the  aid  of  reason.  Further,  the  Church  must  con- 
tent itself  with  preaching  Christ,  that  is,  it  is  in  sub- 
stance nothing  more  than  a  missionary  institution,  a 
school  for  those  who  are  not  yet  true  Christians. 
Therefore,  it  is  neither  competent  nor  authorized  to 
permanently  lead,  rule,  or  hold  in  tutelage  the  true 
Christians,  or  those  who  believe  in  Christ  and  who 
earnestly  desire  to  be  Christians. 

Thus  in  the  first  place  the  mediaeval  cultural  idea 
is  done  away  with  in  principle.  The  Church  is  once 
more  limited  to  its  immediate  vocation,  the  saving  of 
souls.  In  fact,  this  most  direct  task  has  now  become 
its  sole  function,  for  the  day  of  judgment  is  near  at 
hand,  the  number  of  those  who  must  still  be  saved  is 
still  so  great  that  in  the  eyes  of  the  Reformer  all  other 
possible  activities  recede  before  this  one. 

For  that  reason  also  he  never  answered  in  principle 
the  old  problem  "Christianity  and  Civilization,"  which 
his  Reformation  had  set  up  anew.  He  was  content  to 
take  a  stand,  in  the  affirmative,  on  the  question 
whether  a  Christian  could  with  good  conscience  be  an 
official,  soldier,  prince  or  merchant,  and,  furthermore, 
emphatically  reiterated  that  it  was  impious  and  im- 
moral to  lend  money  at  usurious  rates  of  interest. 
That  is  all !  This  much  is  certain,  nevertheless,  he  did 
not  regard  a  complete  adaptation  of  Christianity  to 
civilization  and  of  civilization  to  Christianity  such  as 
the  Middle  Ages  had  striven  to  attain  by  subjecting 


296  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

the  whole  cultural  life  to  the  dominion  of  the  Church 
either  as  possible  or  desirable. 

The  national  church,  however,  had  not  only  for 
Luther  ceased  to  be  the  lawgiver  and  leader  of  the 
whole  cultural  life.  It  had  also  lost  the  right  to  per- 
manently patronize  the  faithful.  Actually  the  Church 
had  nothing  to  say  any  more  to  the  true  Christians. 
They  had  outgrown  its  discipline.  For  that  very  rea- 
son they  are  now  in  a  position  to  realize  an  ideal  which 
the  national  church  as  an  external  institution  of  law 
never  can  realize  by  itself:  the  idea  of  a  Christian 
association.  True  Christians,  namely,  can  combine  in 
so-called  congregations  and  then  in  the  first  place  in 
free  private  religious  exercises  edify  themselves;  sec- 
ondly, they  can  mutually  educate  one  another  after 
the  Christian  ideal  by  means  of  strict  discipline,  and 
thirdly,  they  can  jointly  practice  all  kinds  of  good 
works  of  brotherly  love.  Only  in  this  manner  is  the 
"true  type  of  Evangelical  order"  achieved,  for  thus 
a  form  of  religious  organization  is  attained  which 
corresponds  to  the  Evangelical  view  that  all  Christian 
believers  as  priests  are  able  and  competent  to  decide 
on  questions  of  religious  and  moral  life  by  themselves. 

At  the  very  moment  when  he  reorganizes  the  na- 
tional church,  in  the  Evangelical  sense,  the  Reformer 
also  considers  the  foundation  of  an  altogether  new 
kind  of  religious  organization  which  is  to  take  its  place 
side  by  side  with  the  former.  And  he  certainly  was 
quite  serious  in  this  plan,  even  though  in  view  of  the 
moral  immaturity  of  the  masses  he  as  early  as  1527 
gave  up  the  hope  that  he  himself  would  in  his  own  life- 


PROPHET  OF  A  NEW  IDEAL  297 

time  still  be  able  to  establish  such  congregations,  and 
though  he  was  not  in  the  position  to  voice  approval  of 
the  Hessian  attempt  to  forthwith  put  this  project 
into  execution  in  connection  with  the  reorganization 
of  the  national  church. 

Therefore,  Luther  did  not  simply  retain  the  mediae- 
val institution  of  the  national  church.  On  the  con- 
trary, in  this  instance  also  he  abolished  what  was  spe- 
cifically mediaeval  and  Catholic.  He  gave  an  alto- 
gether new  definition  of  the  tasks  of  the  national 
church,  and  already  planned  the  founding  of  a  com- 
pletely new  type  of  religious  organization  in  which 
for  the  first  time  the  church  ideal  which  corresponded 
to  the  Evangelical  conception  of  the  priesthood  of  the 
faithful — as  far  as  this  is  possible  on  earth — was  to 
find  expression.  This  plan,  to  be  sure,  remained  a 
mere  plan  for  the  present,  but  it  is  very  noteworthy, 
notwithstanding,  that  Luther's  thoughts  on  the  prac- 
tical shaping  of  religious  worship  already  centered 
about  the  two  typical  forms  of  religious  organization, 
the  co-existence  and  relation  of  which  is  just  as  char- 
acteristic for  Protestantism  as  for  Catholicism:  the 
co-existence  and  relation  of  world  church  and  monas- 
ticism;  national  chm^ch  and  congregation.  He  also 
fixed  the  relative  value  of  these  two  types  in  such  a 
way  that  one  can  hardly  say  anything  in  criticism  of 
his  scheme.  Certainly  the  free  association,  as  far  as 
it  does  not  degenerate  into  mere  forming  of  gangs, 
i.  e.,  sectarianism,  is  the  true  type  of  Evangelical  order 
and  the  ideal  calling,  but  the  limits  of  the  national 
church  also  can  hardly  be  characterized  more  accu- 


298  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

rately  than  by  the  predicates,  missionary  institution 
and  school. 

In  view  of  these  considerations,  we  may  justly  as- 
sert that  the  path  to  an  historical  appreciation  of  Lu- 
ther, but  also  of  the  mediaeval  Catholic  system,  is 
closed  to  anyone  who  judges  both  after  the  formula: 
"The  message  of  Luther  is  in  its  essential  character- 
istics only  a  recasting  of  the  mediaeval  idea,"  or 
"merely  a  new  solution  of  mediaeval  Catholic  prob- 
lems." Exactly  the  opposite  is  true.  The  essential 
characteristics  and  the  problems  are  new  vnth  Luther, 
the  forms  have  in  many  respects  remained  the  old.  To 
be  sure,  new  though  the  problems  and  essential  char- 
acteristics of  his  preaching  are,  the  poet  is  right,  never- 
theless, when  he  says  of  him :  His  spirit  is  the  battle- 
ground of  two  ages.  The  Middle  Ages  and  modern 
times,  indeed,  continually  fought  one  another  within 
him,  and  Luther  also  like  all  others,  even  the  most 
eminent  thinkers,  naturally  did  not  at  all  times  suc- 
ceed in  wholly  escaping  the  influence  of  older  habits 
of  thought,  and  of  prejudices  which  in  principle  he 
had  long  ago  overcome. 

Not  infrequently  old  inherited  views  cross  wholly 
new  thoughts  which  Luther  had  worked  out  himself. 
Besides,  he  is  naturally,  in  the  conflict  with  others, 
prone  to  stress  most  sharply  these  vulnerable  positions 
in  his  system  and  to  move  them  into  the  foreground 
so  energetically  as  though  it  were  a  matter  of  life  and 
salvation.  The  classic  example  for  this  is  the  contro- 
versy over  the  Lord's  Supper.  Perhaps  more  clearly 
still,  however,  than  in  his  doctrine  of  the  Sacraments, 


PROPHET  OF  A  NEW  IDEAL  299 

this  peculiar  two-faced  character  of  his  thought  comes 
to  hght  in  his  utterances  on  the  nature  and  worth  of 
marriage,  and  in  his  expositions  on  the  tasks  and  the 
origin  of  the  secular  power,  or  the  state. 

There  have  been  few  men  who  thought  so  highly 
of  marriage  and  who  so  ardently  recommended  it  as 
Luther.  He  never  tires  of  praising  it  as  an  institu- 
tion of  God  and  as  a  school  of  the  most  perfect  moral- 
ity, as  the  sweetest,  loveliest  and  most  chaste  form  of 
life.  To  be  sure,  the  physical  communion  of  married 
people  is  the  basis  for  the  normal  conduct  of  married 
life,  but  it  is  not  the  only,  let  alone  the  highest  purpose 
of  wedlock.  Its  supreme  end  is  the  founding  of  a  not 
merely  natural  but  also  moral  life  companionship  be- 
tween husband  and  wife  which  rests  upon  community 
of  moral  duties,  especially  in  the  education  of  the  chil- 
dren, and  upon  conmiunity  of  religious  conviction. 
However,  these  considerations  are  ever  again  crossed 
by  an  ascetic  reflection  of  which  the  Reformer  is  never 
able  wholly  to  divest  himself.  He,  too,  cannot  help 
seeing  in  the  furor  of  the  sexual  impulse  something 
unclean,  unholy,  in  fact,  a  manifestation  of  sin.  Pur- 
suant to*  this  fact  Luther  always  looks  upon  marriage 
in  the  first  place  as  a  remedy  prescribed  by  God 
against  the  tyrannical  power  of  sensuality,  through 
the  wise  use  of  which  the  unrest  of  passion  is  moder- 
ated and  man  and  woman  are  enabled  to  enter  a  moral 
life  companionship. 

The  same  observations  hold  good  of  his  utterances 
on  the  task,  the  purpose  and  the  origin  of  the  secular 
power.    People  even  to-day  speak  of  Luther's  view, 


300  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

indeed  of  "Luther's  Doctrine  of  the  State  and  So- 
ciety." They  would  do  well  to  forego  this  formula- 
tion at  the  very  outset,  for  it  rouses  altogether  false 
expectations.  As  little  as  the  Reformer  knows  the 
expressions  state  and  society,  so  little  does  he  know 
the  thing  itself.  A  state  and  a  society  in  the  modern 
sense  of  these  terms  did  not  exist  in  the  Central  and 
Northern  Germany  of  his  day.  There  were  only  a 
great  number  of  statelike  formations  which  all,  how- 
ever, furnished  a  very  incomplete  view  of  the  state. 
Small  wonder,  therefore,  that  the  Reformer  also  in 
speculating  about  the  state  always  centers  his  atten- 
tion exclusively  upon  the  strongest  state-forming  fac- 
tor in  those  territories — the  government.  Moreover, 
in  accordance  with  the  political  development  of  his 
surroundings  he  starts  out  from  mediaeval  concepts  in 
fixing  the  duties  of  the  government.  Like  the  classi- 
cal Middle  Ages  Luther  uses  as  the  point  of  departure 
and  presupposition  of  all  political  speculation  the 
idea  of  the  universal  state  of  "Christendom,"  or  of 
"the  common  order  of  Christian  love."  The  preser- 
vation and  government  of  this  body  is  to  his  mind 
everywhere  entrusted  to  the  three  sacred  orders,  or 
the  natural  hierarchy:  those  who  have  the  office  of 
providing,  the  laboring  class;  those  whose  duty  it  is 
to  defend,  the  noble  and  military  class;  those  whose 
function  is  instruction,  the  teaching  class. 

Like  the  classical  Middle  Ages  he  is  furthermore 
interested  only  in  two  problems  of  political  science, 
the  question  about  the  duties  and  purposes,  and  the 
closely  related  one  about  the  origin  of  the  military 


PROPHET  OF  A  NEW  IDEAL  301 

order,  or  the  government.  'And  at  least  this  last  ques- 
tion he,  too,  answers  quite  in  the  manner  of  Augustine 
when  he  claims  that  the  institution  of  a  government 
had  become  necessary  only  as  a  result  of  sin,  and  that 
the  ideal  Christian  really  needed  no  government.  For 
he  says:  "If  all  the  world  were  composed  of  true 
Christians,  no  king,  prince,  lord,  sword  or  law  were 
needful  or  of  any  use.  What  would  be  the  purpose 
of  these,  since  Christians  have  the  Holy  Spirit  in  their 
heart,  who  teaches  and  persuades  them  not  to  do  any- 
one harm,  to  love  all  mankind,  to  suffer  wrong,  even 
death  itself,  from  everyone  cheerfully  and  willingly." 

From  the  foregoing  we  can  understand  that  his 
thoughts  about  the  duties  of  the  government  are  in 
general  very  much  Hke  those  of  the  Middle  Ages. 
The  secular  power  must  keep  down  the  bad  people 
within  its  territories  by  a  strict  handling  of  the  sword. 
Further,  should  its  subjects  be  attacked  from  without 
it  must  defend  them  against  external  foes  in  neces- 
sary wars — for  only  this  type  of  warfare  is  permitted. 
The  guarding  of  the  external  and  internal  peace, 
therefore,  is  the  true  function  of  the  government. 

Notwithstanding,  government,  though  it  has  come 
about  only  as  a  result  of  sin,  is  still  a  divine  institu- 
tion and  foundation.  This  is  not  only  expressly  stated 
in  Holy  Writ,  it  is  also  told  to  everyone  by  the  natural 
right  or  the  natural  law  which  God  in  creation  in- 
scribed into  the  heart  of  man  and  which  for  that  rea- 
son may  also  be  called  divine  right  or  divine  law.  This 
natural  law  is  the  aggregate  of  all  those  moral  claims, 
the  validity  of  which  every  man  recognizes  without 


302  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

question,  because  "his  soul  is  fashioned  and  created 
according  to  them."  It  includes  all  those  claims  which 
have  in  the  Ten  Commandments  once  more  been  ex- 
phcitly  inculcated.  At  the  same  time,  however,  by 
this  law,  all  those  institutions  are  sanctioned  as  di- 
vinely ordained  which  are  safeguarded  by  the  deca- 
logue: marriage,  the  family  and  govermnent.  For 
the  government  "belongs  to  the  paternal  order," 
hence  it  may,  on  the  strength  of  the  natural  law,  lay 
claim  to  the  same  rights  as  the  parents,  may  by  virtue 
of  natural  law  demand  from  all  subjects  honor,  taxes, 
tolls,  all  manner  of  services,  and  obedience  even  to  the 
point  of  sacrificing  life  itself.  Further,  it  may  on 
these  same  grounds  proceed  against  thieves,  robbers, 
murderers  and  rebels  with  the  sword. 

But  the  concept  of  natural  law  is  even  broader  in 
scope.  Already  Luther  holds  to  the  opinion  that  it 
legitimatizes,  as  divinely  appointed,  the  whole  agra- 
rian and  class  organization  of  society  in  the  era  of  the 
Reformation,  and  he  stamps  every  attempt  at  subver- 
sion of  this  order  as  a  crime.  This  is  a  view  which  was 
of  the  utmost  significance  for  the  whole  future  of 
Lutheranism  but  which  at  bottom  is  very  ancient. 
The  concept  of  natural  law  is  a  heritage  of  Greek 
philosophy,  the  equalization  of  this  natural  law  with 
the  decalogue  is  already  known  to  the  ancient  Catholic 
theologians,  and  the  thought  of  basing  the  whole  secu- 
lar legal  and  social  order  upon  it  is  quite  familiar  to  the 
Middle  Ages. 

Luther's  political  and  social  points  of  view  are, 
therefore,  in  some  very  essential  phases  most  anti- 


PROPHET  OF  A  NEW  IDEAL  303 

quated,  mediaeval  and  un-modern.  But  here  again 
it  becomes  manifest  that  his  spirit  is  the  battleground 
of  two  ages.  Here  also  Luther  victoriously  broke 
through  the  mediaeval  attitude  at  the  decisive  points, 
for  the  classical  Middle  Ages  regard  the  holder  of  the 
secular  power  merely  as  the  bailiff  of  the  Church,  secu- 
lar law  is  held  to  be  law  only  in  as  far  as  it  does  not 
conflict  with  ecclesiastical  law  and  is  not  protested  by 
the  Church.  To  be  sure,  this  idea  is  opposed  by  that 
of  the  sovereign  national  state  already  in  the  writings 
of  the  French  publicists  of  the  age  of  Boniface  VIII. 
But  Luther  is  the  first  person  who  succeeds  in  de- 
stroying its  rehgious  roots  in  that  he  dissolves  the 
dogma  of  the  divine  call  of  the  Church  to  the  govern- 
ment of  the  world  and  of  the  religious  sanctions  be- 
hind the  Church  organization.  Not  until  the  appear- 
ance of  Luther,  therefore,  is  the  sovereignty  of  the 
secular  power  established  beyond  a  doubt  also  for 
the  religious  consciousness,  not  until  then  was  every 
attempt  of  the  Church  to  interfere  in  the  political  and 
social  life  as  giver  of  moral  standards  and  of  laws 
demonstrated  to  be  irreligious. 

But  Luther  does  not  only  declare  the  secular  power 
free  from  the  guardianship  of  the  Church,  he  also 
destroys  the  view  which  had  been  made  current  by 
Wiclif,  Huss  and  their  followers  and  which  attrib- 
uted to  the  Bible  law-making  authority  for  the  po- 
litical and  social  life.  Thus  he  also  freed  the  secular 
government  and  the  secular  law  from  the  tutelage  of 
the  letter  of  the  Bible.  He  did  this  by  asserting  that 
all  legal  prescriptions  of  Holy  Writ  have  lost  binding 


304  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

force  for  the  Christians,  and  that  they  are  important 
only  as  examples  of  traditional  legislation. 

At  the  same  time  Luther  energetically  champions 
an  extension  of  the  duties  of  the  state  after  the  mod- 
ern theory  of  the  state.  Though  he  believes  that  the 
guarding  of  the  external  and  internal  peace  is  the 
proper  function  of  government,  he  nevertheless  de- 
mands further  that  the  government  through  the  erec- 
tion of  schools  and  libraries  and  by  means  of  a  certain 
measure  of  compulsory  education  provide  for  the  up- 
bringing of  its  subjects;  further,  that  it  promote 
order  and  decency  in  its  territories  by  strict  use  of  the 
police  against  idleness,  beggary,  drunkenness  and 
luxury  of  dress;  that  it  curb  all  abuse  in  trade  and 
traffic  by  severe  laws  against  usury  and  the  large  cor- 
porations'; that  it  intercede  with  word  and  deed  for 
the  poor,  widows  and  orphans,  and  that  otherwise  also 
it  make  the  material  welfare  of  the  people  its  concern, 
inasmuch  as  it  is  a  further  duty  of  the  government  to 
instruct  everyone  how  to  manage  his  house  and  home 
and  how  to  win  money  and  goods. 

Even  Luther,  therefore,  sees  the  ideal  state  in  his 
mind's  eye  as  a  "Kulturstaat."  True,  this  ideal  was 
not  altogether  new.  It  asserts  itself  already  in  the 
policies  of  the  city  states  of  the  thirteenth  and  four- 
teenth centuries,  and  since  the  fifteenth  is  gaining  in- 
fluence also  on  the  pohcies  of  the  territorial  princes. 
But  no  one  before  Luther  conceived  and  portrayed 
the  "paternal  vocation"  of  the  state  so  broadly  and 
definitely.  He  also  is  responsible  for  the  introduc- 
tion into  political  speculation  of  the  so-called  patri- 


PROPHET  OF  A  NEW  IDEAL  305 

archal  theory,  according  to  which  the  governmental 
authority  is  considered  as  a  developmental  form  of  the 
paternal  power,  and  it  is  he  who  established  the  notion 
that  the  prince  is  the  father  of  his  country  and  must 
rule  as  such.  Thus,  he  paved  the  way  for  a  new  con- 
cept of  the  state  and  of  political  life,  which  though 
it  is  not  identical  with  the  modern  view  of  the  state, 
nevertheless  prepared  the  path  for  the  modern  "Kul- 
turstaat,"  at  least  in  Lutheran  Germany. 

Is  the  view  of  the  Reformer  about  the  relation  of 
the  secular  power  to  religion  and  public  worship  also 
part  of  those  ideas  which  point  beyond  the  Middle 
Ages?  This  question  has  recently  been  much  dis- 
cussed but  answered  very  differently,  depending  en- 
tirely upon  the  degree  of  prominence  given  to  the 
opinions  of  the  young  or  the  old  Luther.  For  Luther 
in  these  two  periods  of  his  life  holds  somewhat  di- 
verging views  on  this  question.  Throughout  his  life 
the  Reformer  clings  firmly  only  to  the  one  principle : 
the  government  has  no  right  to  decide  questions  of 
belief,  and  also  to  the  conviction  that  "thoughts  are 
not  dutiable."  From  this  follows  further  that  the  old 
mediasval  law  on  heresy  which  under  certain  condi- 
tions made  also  the  private  opinions  of  people  the  sub- 
ject of  an  ecclesiastical  criminal  procedure  must  cease 
operating. 

Did  Luther  always  draw  the  same  conclusions  from 
these  fundamental  considerations?  We  must  in  this 
connection  remember  in  the  first  place  that  the  law  of 
the  time  besides  heresy  recognized  also  another  crime 
against  religion:  public  blasphemy.     This  was  gen- 


306  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

erally  regarded  as  a  serious  offense  which  the  govern- 
ment was  in  duty  bound  to  punish.  The  German 
imperial  laws  of  1495,  1512,  1530  and  1532,  in  agree- 
ment with  the  Roman  law,  provide  for  this  crime 
"depending  upon  the  circumstance  and  form  of  the 
person  and  the  blasphemous  act"  in  life  and  limb,  at 
least,  in  case  of  relapse.  Did  Luther  ever  judge  dif- 
ferently on  this  point?  As  far  as  we  know,  never. 
Only  the  question  as  to  what  was  to  be  regarded  as 
blasphemy  was  apparently  not  clear  to  him  at  the  be- 
ginning. (Enders  V,  117.)  Not  until  1530  was  he 
moved  to  give  this  matter  serious  consideration,  and 
thereupon  he  came  to  the  conclusion,  blasphemy  is  all 
public  teaching  and  slander  against  a  public  article 
of  faith,  for  instance,  against  an  article  of  the  Apos- 
tohc  Creed.  (Weimar  Ed.,  XXXI,  1,  18.)  Thus, 
a  person  who  openly  teaches  that  Christ  is  not  God. 
but  a  mere  man,  that  he  has  not  atoned  for  our  sins, 
but  that  this  must  be  done  by  everyone  personally, 
that  there  is  no  such  thing  as  a  resurrection,  an  eter- 
nal life,  and  a  hell,  cannot  be  tolerated  by  the  gov- 
ernment and  must  be  banished  from  the  country. 
Herewith  no  one  is  forced  to  believe,  for  privately 
everybody  may  believe  what  he  wishes,  only  public 
teaching  and  slander  against  the  "conmion  articles  of 
Christendom"  is  interdicted. 

This  shows  sufficiently  that  the  Reformer  never 
thought  of  unrestricted  freedom  of  teaching  and  re- 
ligion. The  mere  possibility  of  such  a  thing  was  alto- 
gether foreign  to  the  thought  of  this  age.  Neverthe- 
less, Luther's  definition  leaves  a  wide  range  for  teach- 


PROPHET  OF  A  NEW  IDEAL  307 

ing  and  for  blasphemy.  Did  he  within  this  scope  hold 
unrestricted  freedom  of  teaching  to  be  lawful  and 
proper?  For  the  first,  yes  I  As  late  as  the  summer  of 
1522,  he  says,  in  writing  about  Miinzer  and  his  as- 
sociates :  "There  must  be  some  sects."  (Weimar  Ed., 
XV,  218.)  "Let  the  intellects  clash  and  meet  in  con- 
troversy. If  as  a  result  some  are  led  astray,  let  them 
go,  such  is  the  fortune  of  war.  Where  there  is  con- 
flict and  battle,  there  some  must  fall  or  be  wounded.'* 
This  restricted  freedom  of  teaching  has  only  one 
barrier ;  Rebellion  must  be  preached  under  no  circum- 
stance whatsoever.  Where  this  is  done  there  the  gov- 
ernment must  instantly  interfere  and  straightway  "in- 
terdict the  soil"  to  such  preachers,  whether  they  be 
Lutherans  or  adherents  of  Miinzer.  However,  imder 
the  impression  of  the  great  disaster  which  Karlstadt, 
Miinzer  and  their  companions  had  occasioned  "in  par- 
ishes whither  no  one  had  sent  them"  his  attitude  on 
this  point  is  changed.  "Oppositionary  preaching," 
he  writes  in  1530  (Weimar  Ed.,  XXXI,  1,  209), 
"engenders  not  merely  sectarianism,  but  also  discord, 
hatred  and  jealousy  in  secular  affairs."  In  case, 
therefore,  anywhere  Papists  and  Lutherans  publicly 
preach  and  swear  against  one  another,  and  if  the  Lu- 
therans notice  that  their  preaching  is  not  meeting 
with  sympathetic  ears,  then  they  must  observe 
silence  and  recede.  But  if,  for  conscience'  sake, 
neither  of  the  parties  wants  to  give  way,  then 
the  government  is  to  take  a  hand  and  to  interrogate 
the  combatants.  Whichever  side  then  cannot  prove 
its  stand  from  Scriptures  the  government  must  com- 
mand to  remain  silent. 


308  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

More  intolerable  still,  however,  than  such  public 
dissension  are  the  secret  machinations  of  the  hedge 
priests.  Anyone  who  without  office  or  command 
teaches  secretly  must  certainly  be  planning  rebellion 
or  something  worse.  Such  an  one  must  not  be  per- 
mitted to  go  on,  even  though  he  were  the  Angel  Ga- 
briel himself,  but  must  be  turned  over  to  the  proper 
master,  whose  name  is  Hans,  that  is,  to  the  execu- 
tioner. This  same  rule  is  applicable  also  to  Lutheran 
pastors  if  they  dare  to  secretly  preach  and  teach  in 
the  congregation  of  a  Catholic  or  heretical  clergyman 
without  his  knowledge  or  permission. 

Of  whom  is  the  Reformer  thinking  when  he  speaks 
these  harsh  words?  In  the  first  place  of  the  apostles 
of  the  Anabaptists  who  both  secretly  and  openly 
taught  that  no  government  ought  to  be  tolerated, 
that  no  Christian  be  permitted  to  hold  an  office,  that 
private  property  ought  to  be  done  away  with,  that 
wife  and  child  must  be  forsaken  and  all  things  ought 
to  be  held  in  common.  (Weimar  Ed.,  XXXI,  1, 
208.)  But  were  these  accusations  against  the  Ana- 
baptists altogether  justified?  Were  not  many  of 
them  peaceable,  quiet  and  moderate  people  who  were 
very  far  from  harboring  any  revolutionary  tendencies 
or  intentions?  Certainly,  but  by  far  the  greater  nmn- 
ber  were  not  harmless  by  any  means,  they  were  dis- 
tinctly seditious  in  their  opinions.  That  the  existing 
government  was  an  irreligious  institution  was  the 
dominant  opinion  ever  since  the  death  of  Hubmaier 
even  among  the  moderates,  who  never  thought  of  tak- 
ing the  sword  themselves.     Communistic  ideas  also 


PROPHET  OF  A  NEW  IDEAL  309 

were  everywhere  current  in  the  congregations  of  the 
"children  of  God,"  and  furthermore,  the  conviction 
that  an  adherent  of  Anabaptism  might  without  fur- 
ther ceremony  sever  his  marriage  with  a  "heathen" 
and  forsake  his  children  in  order  to  wed  a  "sister." 
The  most  radical  exponent  of  all  these  views  was  the 
book-agent  Haensel  Hutt  of  Bibra,  the  most  fanati- 
cal and  bloodthirsty  of  all  the  Anabaptist  apostles. 
And  it  was  this  wild  Apocalyptic  himself  who  gained 
the  largest  number  of  adherents  in  the  Franconian 
and  Thuringian  possessions  of  the  Saxon  House. 

It  is  therefore  not  surprising  that  the  Wittenberg 
theologians  in  October,  1531,  in  an  arbitrament  an- 
swer the  question  whether  the  government  ought  to 
punish  the  Anabaptists  with  the  sword  hi  the  affirma- 
tive and  that  also  Luther  adds  his  "placet"  with  the 
characteristic  motivation  that  "though  it  may  seem 
cruel  to  punish  them  with  the  sword,  it  is  more  cruel 
still  that  they  condemn  the  office  of  the  Word  and  sup- 
press the  true  doctrine,  and,  besides,  wish  to  destroy 
the  regna  mundi  (the  secular  government.) "  (C.  R. 
IV,  740. )  A  like  verdict  Luther  uttered  in  an  opmion 
rendered  at  the  time  of  the  Anabaptist  horrors  at 
Miinster  on  the  twentieth  of  October,  1532  (DeWette 
VI,  151),  and  a  similar  one  in  a  memorial  addressed 
to  the  Landgrave  of  Hesse  on  the  fifth  of  June,  1536. 
( Enders  X,  346. )  In  this  latter  document  he  declares 
that  the  prince  is  empowered  to  punish  the  Anabap- 
tists with  the  sword  if  for  no  other  reason  because 
they  had,  despite  their  oath,  again  secretly  entered  his 
territories  and  were  seducing  the  people.     He  ad- 


310  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

vises,  however,  that  at  all  times,  in  accordance  with 
the  circumstances  in  the  individual  cases,  mercy  ought 
to  go  side  by  side  with  punishment.  Finally,  he  once 
more  brieflj^  summarizes  his  attitude  on  this  question 
in  a  Table  Talk  of  September,  1540  (Mathesius,  378)  : 
"The  Anabaptists  who  rebel  against  the  government 
the  Elector  lawfully  punishes  with  death,  the  others, 
who  harbor  fanatical  opinions,  are  mostly  banished 
from  the  country."  It  is  apparent,  therefore,  that  in 
the  matter  of  freedom  of  teaching  Luther  gave  up 
his  earlier  attitude.  Until  1525  he  energetically  cham- 
pions a  restricted  freedom  of  teaching,  later  on  he 
refuses  to  hear  of  it.  Up  to  1525  he  merely  pleads 
banishment,  even  when  notorious  rebels  like  Miinzer 
are  concerned,  later  on  he  deems  the  death  penalty 
justified' in  such  cases. 

What  were  his  views  in  earlier  years  about  blas- 
phemy is  not  clear.  But  later,  in  agreement  with 
Melanchthon  and  in  harmony  with  the  current  law, 
he  evidently  regards  blasphemy,  that  is,  every  kind 
of  public  teaching  and  slander  against  the  doctrines  of 
the  Apostolic  Creed  as  a  crime  worthy  of  capital  pun- 
ishment. (Enders  VIII,  163.)  This  certainly  is  a 
significant  change  in  his  opinions.  But  are  we  right 
if,  in  view  of  this,  we  assert:  In  his  age  Luther  re- 
turned again  to  the  old  law  on  heresy?  No.  He 
neither  knows  nor  desires  an  Inquisition,  nor  an  ec- 
clesiastical heresy  trial,  he  knows  only  a  secular  puni- 
tive procedure  exercised  in  disturbance  of  the  peace 
of  the  Church  through  discordant  teachings,  in  sedi- 
tious agitation  against  the  established  political  order 


PEOPHET  OF  A  NEW  IDEAL  311 

and  in  public  blasphemy,  and  he  regards  the  death 
penalty  as  proper  only  in  those  cases  where  also  the 
laws  of  the  state  demand  it,  in  rebellion  and  blas- 
phemy. Private  religious  opinion,  however,  is  not 
interfered  with  either  before  or  after.  Personal  con- 
victions are  never  to  become  the  subject  of  criminal 
procedure.  If  we  compare  with  these  principles  and 
with  the  practice  of  the  Lutheran  governments  based 
upon  them  the  principles  and  the  practice  of  the  Papal 
Inquisition  in  Italy  since  1542,  we  will  not  long  re- 
main in  doubt  about  the  difference  between  Luther- 
anism  and  Catholicism  also  with  regard  to  freedom 
of  thought  and  of  teaching. 

Very  similar  to  his  position  on  freedom  of  teaching 
is  the  Reformer's  attitude  on  the  freedom  of  worship. 
In  his  younger  years  he  did  not  busy  himself  with  this 
question  at  all,  later  on  he  always  answers  it  on  the 
basis  of  three  principles  which  to  him  have  the  force 
of  axioms:  public  worship  is  part  of  the  municipal 
law,  and  is  therefore  part  of  the  public  order;  the 
preaching  of  two  divergent  doctrines  necessarily  leads 
to  sedition ;  true  religion  is  known  and  it  alone  has  any 
claim  to  public  toleration.  From  these  premises  he 
draws  the  conclusion:  The  suppression  of  the  public 
Catholic  worship  is  a  duty  of  the  government,  the 
suppression  of  Evangelical  preaching,  however,  on 
the  other  hand  is  an  unjustifiable  tyranny  over  reli- 
gious belief. 

Hence  Luther  not  only  approves  of  the  prohibition 
of  Catholic  worship  but  demands  it,  in  fact,  in  his 
opinion,  it  is  not  religious  coercion  if  the  government 


312  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

forces  gross  slanderers  into  the  Evangelical  services 
and  makes  them  memorize  the  Evangelical  catechism, 
so  that  they,  at  least,  learn  the  "economy,"  that  is, 
learn  how  they  ought  to  behave  as  citizens  and  heads 
of  families.  For  in  Luther's  eyes  the  national  church 
is  not  only  a  missionary  institution  for  the  kingdom 
of  Christ,  but  also  a  public  educational  institution  in 
which  civic  morality  and  decency  is  inculcated,  and 
hence  it  has  claim  not  only  upon  protection  but  also 
for  material  aid  from  the  government.  However,  all 
this  does  not  in  any  way  touch  the  freedom  of  private 
worship:  "In  their  chambers  also  those  of  other  re- 
ligious convictions  may  adore  and  worship  whomso- 
ever they  wish  and  as  many  gods  as  they  want  to." 
Hence,  if  it  pleases  the  monks  behind  closed  doors  to 
commit'their  blasphemous  acts  they  must  be  hindered 
just  as  little  as  the  Jews  in  their  synagogues. 

But  what  if  Catholic  princes  retaliate  in  kind  upon 
Evangelical  believers  and  suppress  the  free  preaching 
of  the  gospel?  They  are  in  that  case  doubtless  ty- 
rants, manifestly  rebels  against  God's  Word.  How- 
ever, may  they  be  treated  as  such,  is  it  allowable  to 
rise  and  plot  against  them  and  put  an  end  to  their 
rule?  By  no  means.  If  they  do  not  wish  to  tolerate 
Evangelical  preaching,  they  may  do  so  on  their  own 
responsibility  and  at  their  own  peril.  But  they  are 
held  to  at  least  grant  to  their  Evangehcal  subjects 
the  free  permission  to  leave  their  lands.  Only  in  a 
single  instance  did  the  Reformer  forsake  this  prin- 
ciple to  which  otherwise  he  adhered  strictly.  He  con- 
ceded to  the  Evangelical  princes,  though  not  to  the 


PROPHET  OF  A  NEW  IDEAL  313 

Evangelical  subjects  the  right  to  proceed  with  the 
sword  against  those  who  defend  false  doctrine  and 
worship  and  who  try  to  coerce  others  into  the  same. 

Does  it  not  follow  from  all  this  that  Luther  granted 
to  the  secular  power  the  right  to  decide  questions  of 
faith  and  to  determine  the  public  worship  in  their  ter- 
ritories? Not  at  all.  The  government  has  over 
against  religion  only  duties,  no  rights.  After  the 
opinion  of  Luther  it  occupies  toward  the  question  of 
worship  much  the  same  position  as  that  which  the 
modern  state  in  the  opinion  of  the  modern  world  oc- 
cupies over  against  the  task  of  fostering  science.  Just 
as  it  is  generally  demanded  to-day  that  the  state  pro- 
tect science  and  furnish  it  with  abundant  means, 
while,  nevertheless,  the  state  is  denied  any  right  to 
prescribe  to  the  devotees  of  science  their  methods  or 
the  conclusions  they  must  reach,  so  Luther  also  re- 
gards the  relationship  of  the  state  to  religion  as  one 
of  reverence,  from  which  there  result  for  the  pohtical 
power  only  duties,  but  no  rights  whatsoever.  It  is  the 
duty  of  the  Emperor  and  the  princes  to  check  the 
evils  in  the  Church  by  calling  a  council  (Address  to 
the  Nobility,  1520)  ;  it  is  a  duty  of  the  territorial 
lords  to  institute  a  system  of  church  inspection,  to 
suppress  Catholic  worship,  to  prepare  a  free  path  for 
God's  Word  by  caUing  Evangelical  preachers.  But 
even  by  the  most  loyal  fulfillment  of  these  duties  the 
government  never  acquires  the  right  to  rule  the 
Church  and  to  decide  on  questions  of  belief. 

Nothing  is  further  from  the  truth,  therefore,  than 
the  notion  that  the  system  in  which  the  political  sov- 


314  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

ereign  controls  the  Church  is  the  form  of  church 
regime  which  most  closely  corresponds  to  Luther's 
ideals.  On  the  contrary,  we  may  assert  that  this  form 
of  church  government,  as  far  as  it  is  govermnent  at 
all,  as  the  very  name  shows,  is  in  direct  opposition  to 
Luther's  principal  concept  of  religion. 

It  is  furthermore  impossible  to  bring  this  form  of 
church  government  into  direct  connection  historically 
with  the  Reformation.  For  it  is  not  a  product  of  the 
reformatory  speculation  at  all,  but,  as  especially  the 
development  of  the  Church  of  England  proves  in  a 
classical  example,  an  outcome  of  late  mediseval  pubhc 
law  fertilized  by  ideas  emanating  from  the  ancient 
Germanic  "Eigenkirchentum."  This  latter  fact,  of 
course,  in  no  way  decides  its  value  for  the  present 
time,  "for  the  question  as  to  how  a  legal  system  or  an 
idea  originated,  is  for  the  determination  of  its  worth 
just  as  indifferent  as  the  question  whether  its  author 
was  beautiful  or  homely. 

Moreover,  as  little  as  the  idea  of  the  state  church,  so 
little  can  the  modern  natural  law  ideal  of  the  self- 
governing  congregation,  made  up  of  the  payers  of  the 
church  tax,  be  regarded  as  a  legitimate  development 
from  Lutheran  principles.  It  is  true,  the  Reformer, 
in  the  first  years  of  the  Evangelical  movement,  fre- 
quently enough  argued :  Every  Christian  assembly  or 
congregation  is  capable  and  empowered  to  judge  on 
all  doctrine  and  to  install  or  depose  its  teachers, 
i.  e.j  its  pastors ;  every  Cliristian  has  the  right  to  repri- 
mand the  preacher  in  a  respectful  and  modest  manner 
should  he  err.    But  on  what  fact  is  this  competency 


PEOPHET  OF  A  NEW  IDEAL  315 

based  in  the  opinion  of  Luther?  Self -evidently  not 
on  mere  external  membership  in  a  congregation  but 
on  membership  in  the  ideal  community  of  the  faithful. 
And  why?  Because  this  right  presupposes  the  ability 
to  "judge  all  doctrines,"  which,  however,  is  found  only 
in  those  people  to  whom  God  has  given  faith,  and  to 
whom  he  has  thereby  opened  an  understanding  for  his 
promises  and  commands,  or  his  revelation. 

It  follows  from  this  that  all  the  utterances  about 
the  congregation  from  the  years  1520-23  must  be 
judged  in  accordance  with  the  expositions  about  the 
assembly  or  congregation  of  the  year  1525-27  with 
which  we  are  familiar.  Not  until  he  gave  these  had 
the  Reformer  finished  the  difficult  task  of  finding  an 
organization  which  conformed  to  his  religious  ideals 
and  which  did  not  abolish  or  disturb  the  efficient  oper- 
ation of  the  national  church.  In  these  latter  pro- 
nouncements for  the  first  time  all  that  is  made  clearly 
apparent  after  which  Luther  had  always  striven  in 
obscure  longing.  In  them  also  for  the  first  time  is 
distinctly  shown  that  the  ideal  which  he  had  before  his 
eyes  was  not  the  autonomous  congregation,  but  the 
self-governing  community  of  the  true  believers. 
From  out  of  this  ideal,  it  is  quite  evident,  one  may 
possibly  arrive  at  the  autonomous  congregation  of  the 
Independents,  but  never  at  the  modern  natural-law 
theory  of  the  congregation. 

Thus  in  the  soul  of  the  Reformer  ancient  and  in- 
herited, wholly  new  and  novel,  truly  mediaeval  and 
unquestionably  modern  ideas  and  moods  intertwine 
and  permeate  one  another.    Hence  it  is  not  an  easy 


316  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

matter  to  characterize  Luther  as  a  thinker.  One  who 
considers  him  from  the  standpoint  of  present-day  civ- 
ihzation  will  naturally  always  be  struck  especially  by 
the  "Old-Franconian"  and  mediaeval  elements  of  his 
character,  and  he  will,  therefore,  be  in  danger  of  over- 
looking its  undoubtedly  modern  phases.  A  person 
who  approaches  him  from  the  Middle  Ages,  however, 
will,  on  the  contrary,  be  most  impressed  by  the  unde- 
niably modern  features  of  his  thought,  so  that  he  will 
be  tempted  to  disregard  the  Middle  Ages  and  to 
portray  Luther  as  a  modern  man.  In  reality  he  is 
neither  the  one  nor  the  other.  He  is  not  a  medieval 
man,  for  he  burst  the  iron  ring  of  the  mediseval  view 
of  the  world  at  just  the  point  where  so  far  it  had  most 
strongly  bound  even  the  most  vigorous  spirits.  Nor 
is  the  Reformer  a  modern  man,  for  he  retained  many 
genuinely  mediseval  concepts. 

However,  Luther  can  hkewise  not  well  be  conceived 
as  a  so-called  transitional  type.  For  in  the  first  place 
the  transition  which  is  connected  with  his  name  is  not 
merely  a  transition,  but  a  revolution,  which  attacked 
the  very  foundations  of  the  cultm'al  system  as  it  had 
hitherto  existed,  a  revolution  through  which  cultural 
life  was  led  over  into  entirely  new  channels.  He  is, 
secondly,  not  a  transitional  type  because  this  revolu- 
tion was  not  merely  automatically  consummated  in 
his  person,  not  merely  experienced  by  him  as  an  ex- 
terior occurrence,  but  because  it  was  executed  by  him 
and  made  an  event  for  mankind  through  him  alone. 
Thus  also  as  a  thinker  Luther  is  not  a  type,  but  a 
"man  by  himself,"  who  belongs  to  no  age  exclusively. 


PROPHET  OF  A  NEW  IDEAL  317 

and  who  for  that  very  reason  at  the  same  time  is  a 
"genius"  in  the  classic  sense  of  that  term,  i.  e.,  a  man 
who,  as  a  productive  force,  exerted  a  most  powerful 
influence  on  the  contemporary  and  later  world. 

Who  wishes  to  do  full  justice  to  the  Reformer,  there- 
fore, dare  not  attempt  merely  to  portray  him  as  a 
product  of  already  existing  forces,  but  must  depict 
him  also  as  a  productive  force  by  determining  all  those 
manifold  results  which  emanated  from  him.  Only 
m  these  does  his  tremendous'  productivity  become 
truly  visible.  Such  a  portrayal,  however,  would  be 
out  of  place  at  this  juncture. 

Only  this  one  fact  may  still  be  emphasized:  One 
seriously  underestimates  Luther  by  considering  him 
solely  as  the  founder  of  Lutheranism.  That  religious 
group  is  only  one  of  the  world-historical  consequences 
of  the  powerful  movement  which  he  called  forth. 
Side  by  side  with  Lutheranism  one  must  always  name 
also  the  other  great  and  small  church  bodies  which 
owe  their  existence  to  this  movement:  the  Reformed 
Church,  the  Church  of  England,  the  Schwenkfeldians, 
the  Independents,  and  even  the  Anabaptists  and 
Quakers.  His  relation  to  these  churches  is  much 
like  that  of  Augustine  to  the  Catholic  Church  of  the 
Middle  Ages.  Just  as  Catholicism  did  not  take  up 
the  whole  Augustine,  so  also  none  of  these  churches  ex- 
pressed clearly  and  exhaustively  the  Christianity  of 
Luther.  In  all  of  them,  in  a  manner  of  speaking,  it 
suffered  a  mediavalization,  in  the  first  place  already 
in  this  wise  that  they  allowed  the  remnants  of  mediae- 
val thought  which  Luther  had  not  overcome  to  con- 


318  LUTHER  IN  LIGHT  OF  RECENT  RESEARCH 

tinue  on ;  secondly,  in  that  they  again  accepted  genu- 
ine mediaeval  ideas,  and  thirdly,  inasmuch  as  they 
in  the  majority  organized  as  compulsory  religious 
organizations  after  the  type  of  the  medieval  national 
church. 

As  Augustine,  therefore,  did  not  cease  operating 
when  the  mediiEval  ecclesiastical  and  cultural  system 
dissolved,  so  Luther  also  did  not  stop  being  effective 
when  those  oldest  organizations  of  Protestant  Chris- 
tianity were  dissolved.  Rather,  his  influence  on  re- 
ligious development  continued.  It  is  even  now  in  the 
Protestant  world  more  vigorous  and  powerful  than 
that  of  any  other  religious  personality.  But  Luther 
never  restricted  himself — and  in  this  respect  he  is 
again  like  Augustine — merely  to  the  field  of  religion. 
He  embraced  the  whole  of  cultural  hfe.  Mediaeval 
civilization  was  altogether  an  ecclesiastical  one,  i,  e., 
a  civilization  founded  and  dominated  by  the  Church. 
By  attacking  the  Chui'ch,  therefore,  Luther,  without 
realizing  it,  at  the  same  time  provided  the  impetus  for 
the  abolition  of  the  civilization,  created  and  directed 
by  it,  and  for  the  growth  of  a  new  civilization.  To 
what  extent  he  himself  participated  in  this,  and  how 
far,  in  individual  instances,  the  remoter  effects  of  his 
religious  reform  reach,  that,  to  be  sure,  is  far  from 
having  been  determined  in  detail.  Solely  about  this 
there  is  no  doubt:  That  he  blazed  a  path  for  the  new 
age  at  just  that  point  from  out  of  which  the  recasting 
of  civilization,  as  things  stood,  could  alone  proceed, 
and  that  for  this  reason  if  for  none  other  he  may  well 
be  called  and  celebrated  a  hero  of  civilization. 


a  pictorial  Cifc 


of 


Cutl^cr 


Being  the  First  Publication  of 

the  Collection  of  Rare  Prints 

in  the  Possession  of 

REV.  WILLIAM   KOEPCHEN 

Who  also  contributes 
the  Descriptive  Text  and  Titles 


1916 

THE  CHRISTIAN  HERALD 
Bible  House,  New  York 


Copyright  1916 
By  The  Christian  Herald 


THE  PICTORIAL  STORY  OF  LUTHER'S 
LIFE  AND  WORK. 

By  Prof.  W.  H.  T.  Dau. 

IVJO  person  engaged  in  the  work  of  instructing 
^  others  or  of  conveying  information  to  the  gen- 
eral iDubhc  will  undervalue  the  aid  derived  from  a 
good  illustration.  The  pictorial  art  has  a  recognized 
mission  in  every  department  of  the  education  of  our 
race.  In  the  study  of  historical  subjects,  in  particu- 
lar, there  will  be  manifested  by  every  healthy  mind 
a  keen  desire  to  behold  the  likeness  of  the  famous  men 
who  achieved  great  things  in  this  world,  to  obtain  a 
glimpse  of  the  places  where,  and  the  physical  condi- 
tions, under  which,  their  work  was  performed ;  to  have 
placed  before  one  a  suggestive  representation  of  de- 
cisive moments  in  their  lives,  and  to  see  the  dramatic 
scenes  in  which  they  were  the  actors. 

We  do  not  realize,  as  a  rule,  how  much  knowledge 
is  taken  up  by  us  unconsciously  since  our  childhood 
days  by  looking  at  pictures.  And  not  only  knowledge 
is  gathered  in  this  way,  but  settled  opinions  are 
formed,  aspirations  quickened,  preferences  and  aver- 
sions fixed.  A  young  boy  is  turning  in  a  seemingly 
listless  way  the  pages  in  Dore's  Bible  Gallery,  or  sits 
musing  over  the  quaint  drawings  of  Schnorr  von 
Carolsfeld,  or  over  the  Perry  pictures,  or  the  Tissot 
Collection,  or  Mastroianni's  sculptural  reliefs,  depict- 


ing  scenes  from  the  life  of  Christ.  In  not  a  few  in- 
stances what  appeared  to  be  a  mere  mechanical 
perusal  of  a  book  of  pictures  has  proven  a  remark- 
ably efficient  medium  of  information  and  character- 
formation.  But  why  dilate  on  something  that  every- 
body concedes  and  no  one  disputes? 

Those  were  stirring  times  four  hundred  years  ago. 
The  world  seemed  out  of  joint.  A  battle  was  on,  and 
the  din  of  the  conflict  was  reverberating  through  Eu- 
rope, from  the  Grampian  Hills  to  the  Golden  Horn, 
and  from  Madrid  to  Riga.  Yea,  they  were  telling 
in  the  streets  of  Jerusalem  how  a  German  friar  had 
defied  the  Bishop  of  Rome.  They  were  noting,  some 
with  plain  satisfaction,  some  with  amazement,  some 
with  feelings  still  undefined,  that  serious-minded  men 
throughout  Europe  were  siding  with  the  monk  against 
the  bishop,  and  not  a  few  persons  of  consequence  and 
authority  were  either  openlj^  abetting  the  monk  in  his 
endeavor  or  secretly  shielding  him  from  the  fury  of  his 
enemies. 

It  was  a  war  different  from  the  one  which  is  now 
convulsing  Europe.  There  was  no  clashing  of  arms, 
no  brandishing  of  swords,  no  crackle  of  musketry,  no 
endless  columns  of  warriors  marching  to  the  beat  of 
the  drum  to  take  up  their  positions  in  the  serried  ranks 
of  battle.  There  was  not  heard  the  cannons'  echoing 
roar,  that  shatters  men's  nerves  and  then,  after  a 
short  shrift,  sends  them  into  the  carnage  of  the  bay- 
onet charge.  At  any  rate,  no  battle  of  this  kind  was 
fought  in  this  war  until  a  generation  later.  It  was  a 
battle  of  spirits.    The  war  was  in  the  hearts  of  men. 


Convictions  clashed.  Arguments  grappled.  Princi- 
2)les  were  pitted  against  principles,  declarations  de- 
fied by  counter-declarations.  Superstitions  were  shat- 
tered, and  belief's  sustained.  It  was  as  if  the  plan 
of  this  battle  had  been  formulated  by  the  ancient 
prophet  who  said:  "Not  by  might,  nor  by  power,  but 
by  my  spirit,  saith  the  Lord  of  hosts."  (Zech.  4:6.) 

The  story  of  that  mighty  conflict  has  been  told  by 
some  of  the  ablest  writers  of  the  world.  The  his- 
torian, the  novelist,  the  dramatist,  the  poet,  have  vied 
with  each  other  to  immortalize  the  actors  and  the 
scenes  in  that  war.  But  the  painter  and  the  sculptor 
have  not  been  behind  their  brother  artists  and  scholars 
in  zealous  devotion  to  the  stirring  subj  ect  of  this  war : 
with  more  than  ordinary  prodigality  and  eminent 
skill  they  have  reproduced  to  the  eye  the  leading 
figures  and  the  most  notable  events  in  that  conflict. 
Luther's  face,  in  particular,  as  that  of  the  master 
mind  of  the  reformatory  movement,  has  become  fa- 
miliar to  most  men  of  our  day  who  lay  claim  to  some 
degree  of  culture.  Artistic  representations  of  scenes 
from  his  life  adorn  some  of  the  most  famous  galleries 
of  Europe. 

We  are  on  the  eve  of  the  four  hundredth  anni- 
versary of  that  event  from  which  the  beginning  of  the 
Reformation  is  commonly  reckoned — the  publication 
of  Luther's  Ninety-five  Theses  against  the  sale  of  in- 
dulgences on  the  thirty-first  of  October,  1517.  Able 
authors  have  in  most  recent  times  given  us  very  cred- 
itable accounts  of  Luther's  life-work.  Some  have  en- 
livened the  pages  of  their  books  with  illustrations. 


Among  these  there  have  been  re^^roduced  some  rare 
prints. 

The  vokime  which  is  here  submitted  to  the  reader 
has  separated  the  narrative  of  Luther's  hfe  from  the 
illustrations:  it  makes  the  pictures  tell  the  story  of 
Luther.  The  views  assembled  in  this  volume  are  the 
result  of  critical  and  painstaking  research.  Years 
were  spent  in  getting  them  together.  Rev.  William 
Koepchen,  himself  an  ardent  and  loyal  Lutheran, 
and  the  pastor  of  a  large  Lutheran  Church  in  New 
York  City,  has  collected  these  views  and  written  the 
informing  and  stirring  explanatory  remarks  that  ac- 
company them.  The  patient  labor  which  he  has  ex- 
pended in  the  assembling  of  the  various  parts  that 
make  up  this  series  has  been  ably  seconded  by  the 
publisher  of  this  memorial  volume.  No  expense  has 
been  spared  by  The  Christian  Herald  in  the  en- 
deavor to  make  these  views  historically  accurate  and 
artistically  adequate  to  the  great  subject  which  they 
treat. 

May  it  achieve  its  silent  mission  of  enlightenment 
and  encouragement  in  many  a  Christian  home,  placing 
before  the  old  at  a  glance  many  a  scene  that  has  dimly 
formed  in  their  minds  during  hours  of  laborious  read- 
ing, and  attracting  the  inquiring  youths  who  may 
draw  an  inspiration  from  the  imperishable  work  of  a 
plain  man  of  the  people  and  a  loyal  son  of  the  church 
of  Jesus  Christ,  who  dared  to  obey  God's  Word 
rather  than  men. 

W.  H.  T.  Dau. 
St.  Louis,  Mo.,  October  20,  1915. 


C^':^^^^^iSr^  , 


Martin   Luther. 


There  are  men  of  whom  the  world  will  never  be  tired,  and 
Martin  Luther  is  one  of  them.  It  would  be  saying  little  to 
state  that  he  is  a  representative  man.  He  is  one  of  the  vital 
forces  of  modern  civilization.  Blot  Luther  from  the  sixteenth 
century  and  the  historical  development  of  the  last  four  hun- 
dred years  would  have  been  impossible.  By  him  the  seething 
elements  of  progress  were  fused,  forgei^.  into  a  thunderbolt, 
and  hurled  against  that  power  which  obstructed  the  march  of 
civilization,  and  led  mankind  captive  at  its  will. 

3 


Luther's  Father. 


Hans  Luther  was  a  firm,  straightforward,  and  pious  man, 
endowed  with  an  unusual  portion  of  sound  sense.  He  knew 
what  he  wanted  and  had  no  fear  of  saying  what  he  meant  in 
unmistakable  terms.  His  integrity  and  sturdy  common  sense 
made  him,  in  later  life,  a  respected  adviser  of  the  princes  at 
Mansfeld  and  a  trusted  magistrate. 

4 


^f       mLm      \L      1 

1 

1    '"^il^^^l     'VUL/^'  ' 

1    ^SP^^^^^^^ 

Luther's  Mother. 


Margaretha  Zicgler  of  Eisenach  had  been  known  as  a 
virtuous  and  pious  girl.  She  retained  her  modesty  and  fear 
of  God  after  her  marriage  to  Hans  Luther,  and  led  such  a 
virtuous  life  that  she  could  be  made  a  model  for  her  sex.  On 
her  face,  as  preserved  by  Cranach's  brush,  the  struggles  of 
her  early  life  are  recorded.  For  many  years,  nearly  every 
waking  hour  was  spent  in  exhausting  manual  labor. 
5 


The  House  Where  Martin  Luther  Was  Born. 


Tt  stands  in  Eisleben,  Saxony,  at  the  top  of  the  street 
which  bears  his  name.  The  house  was  partly  burned  in  1689. 
but  was  restored  in  1817.  The  modern  entrance  is  surmounted 
by  a  poorly  executed  bust  of  Luther  with  the  following  in- 
scription :  "In  this  house  Dr.  Martin  Luther  was  born  Novem- 
ber 10,  1483.  God's  Word  and  Luther's  doctrine  pure  shall 
to  eternity  endure." 


6 


Mansfeld. 


Mansfeld  is  to-day  a  small  town,  with  a  church  in  the 
center  and  rnins  of  a  castle  on  a  high  hill.  In  1533  it  had 
three  churches  and  the  castle  was  in  its  splendor,  with  high- 
roofed  buildings,  spires,  and  walls  pierced  by  numerous  win- 
dows. Here  Martin  grew  up  under  the  shadow  of  dark  and 
wooded  cliffs,  crowned  by  the  castle  of  the  Counts  of  Mansfeld 
and  pierced  by  the  shafts  of  the  mines. 


CoTTA  House  in  Eisenach. 


In  the  congenial  atmosphere  of  home  and  school  in  Eise- 
nach, Luther  developed  rapidly  and  made  such  progress  in 
his  studies  that,  at  the  age  of  eighteen  years,  he  said  farewell  to 
the  generous  Cotta  family  and  their  home  to  enter  the  old  and 
famous  University  at  Erfurt,  at  that  time,  perhaps,  the  most 
advanced  of  the  higher  institutions  of  learning  in  Germany. 


10 


Luther  Received  into  Cotta's  Home  at  Eisenach. 


While  attending  school  at  Eisenach,  Luther  joined  one  of 
the  companies  of  singers  who  went  from  house  to  house  singing 
and  accepting  money.  His  beautiful  voice  brought  him  to  the 
attention  of  Ursula  Cotta,  the  pious  wife  of  a  wealthy  mer- 
chant. She  took  him  into  her  home,  spoke  to  him  sympathet- 
ically and  made  him  one  of  her  family, 

12 


Old  Erfurt- 


It  was  the  custom  of  the  students  who  did  not  board 
with  one  of  the  professors  to  live  at  the  "Burse,"  a  com- 
bination of  dormitory  and  eating-club.  Luther  lived  at  the 
Burse  of  St.  George,  which  once  stood  on  Lehmann's  Bridge. 
It  was  a  building  similar  to  the  one  seen  on  this  Kramer- 
briicke. 

13 


ff 


!5^ 


Erfurt  University. 


The  Universitj^  at  Erfurt  was  one  of  the  earliest  on  Ger- 
man soil.  It  was  founded  in  1392,  and  reached  its  high- water 
mark  in  1480,  with  an  enrollment  of  2,000.  On  the  records,  still 
preserved,  though  the  university  ceased  to  exist  in  1816,  may 
be  read  to-day  the  entry  : ' '  JNIartinus  Luder  ex  IMansf  eld. ' ' 
14 


s  >^  ^ 

Eh    (jj    H 
^    -<    02 


sT+L    ^   -T^       '-^      A      ^^      ^      ril     xL      '^   .4,   -^      i-      ^,      S    TS  "TJ    -^-^      "1^  .rH 

i^  ^  si's « s  o  £-1  g^  j-s  %sM  >^B  l.-e  S 

15 


«3    O)    ;» 

^  ^  o 


Luther  as  Studext  at  Erfurt. 


Luther  was  a  sociable  fellow,  witty,  talkative,  fond  of  joke 
and  jest,  and  devoted  to  music,  for  which  he  had  a  natural 
talent,  and  which  he  regarded  as  one  of  the  most  beautiful 
gifts  of  God,  ranking  it  next  after  theology  in  importance. 
When  he  felt  fatigued  or  otherwise  indisposed  with  study  and 
writing,  he  took  his  flute  or  liis  guitar  and  played  some  agree- 
able air.  He  often  praised  the  art  of  music  to  his  friends,  say- 
ing : ' '  Music  is  tlie  best  cordial  to  a  person  in  sadness ;  it  soothes, 
quickens  and  refreshes  the  heart. ' ' 


16 


S3 
< 


=3    !=!    a    Ph 

o       g  '^  ■ 
S  .2    Si)  "S 

^  -£  -^  f  fi 

s    :3    oj  -S 


;i3    =«    OP   o    c3 


o)  ^  a 


O      O    --I    q_,  g 


P^ 


W  +-■^1^ 


O-c 


CO     "-I 


O  : 


17 


Luther  at  the  Augustinian  IMonastery  at  Erfurt. 


No  exemptions  from  the  hnmiliating  duties  in  the  cloister 
were  made  for  this  distinguished  Master  of  Arts.  He  swept 
the  walks,  scrubbed  the  floors,  washed  the  filthiest  vessels,  and, 
with  a  sack  on  his  back,  begged  provisions  in  Erfurt  and  the 
neighboring  villages.  But  the  spiritual  peace  for  which  his 
heart  craved  did  not  come  to  his  heart  by  this  participation  in 
the  duties,  drudgeries  and  humiliations  of  convent  life. 
]8 


oj   52   o   c  ^  .S 

-5  St  °13  i 


ar.  .,^-  .o.-5p|^^     =1^-    a| 


.ii   ^-   a.  -:=  -s  .^5 


^  Eh 


>    O    O         /v»    ^    ^ 


19 


JOHANN   VON   StAUPITZ,  D.D. 

In  this  Vicar  General  of  the  Aiigustinian  Order  the  monk 
Luther  found  a  sincere  friend  and  spiritual  helper.  Staupitz 
was  of  noble  birth,  of  high  scholarly  attainments  and  with  a 
spirit  of  simple,  unaffected  piety  and  wide  sympathies.  His 
judgment  was  sober,  and  his  great  tact  in  dealing  with  cases 
of  conscience  made  him  pre-eminently  a  true  shepherd  of  souls. 
The  portrait  represents  Staupitz  as  Abbot  of  the  Benedictine 
Monastery  of  St.  Peter  at  Salzburg.    He  died  there  in  1524. 


20 


o 

^  i 

> 

o 


N    s 

c3     o 
=3     ^ 


o 


.3  ^ 


^  1;^  •- 
.S 

.2  ^  g) 


•^  z 

.a  s 
a  a 


O  ^ 


O 


CC     I— I 


CD 

"^    o 
Ph 


O)    ^ 


O      0; 


^   P 


rj    a; 
'IS 


03     O 


s  §  § 

;-i  PI 

+j     (U  o 

o    1^  .ti 

=«  «j  a 


Of     ;^ 


21 


SCALA    SaNCTA, 

One  of  the  many  shrines  visited  by  Luther  during  his 
stay  in  Rome  was  the  "Scala  Sancta,"  or  Pilate's  Staircase, 
supposed  to  be  the  very  stairway  upon  which  our  Saviour 
ascended  to  the  palace  of  Pontius  Pilate.  Luther  crawled  up 
these  steps  upon  his  knees  but  failed  to  experience  any  spiritual 
satisfaction  in  this  exercise. 

22 


Martin  Luther,  Doctor  op  Theology. 

Staupitz,  wishing  to  be  relieved  from  his  duties  at  the 
university,  had,  with  the  consent  of  the  Elector,  selected  Luther 
as  his  successor.  Luther  urged  his  delicate  health  and  begged 
to  be  excused.  But  he  finally  consented,  held  the  required  dis- 
putation, October  18,  1512,  and  was  with  all  due  ceremony 
created  a  Doctor  of  Divinity  on  the  following  day,  pledging 
himself  to  devote  his  whole  life  to  the  study,  exposition,  and 
defense  of  the  Scriptures.  This  pledge  gave  him  privileges 
and  rights  which  his  enemies  could  not  deny,  and  it  laid  on 
him  obligations  and  duties  which  he  never  forgot. 

23 


Leo  X. 


Reared  amidst  all  the  luxuries  wealth  could  bring  and  en- 
joying the  highest  social  rank,  this  pope  recoiled  from  the 
coarse  sensuality  of  Alexander  VI,  but  he  was  no  less  a  devotee 
of  pleasure,  according  to  the  standards  of  his  more  cultivated 
tastes.  In  furthering  his  plans  for  personal  pleasure,  as  well 
as  in  continuing  the  adornment  of  the  Papal  city  in  keeping 
with  the  artistic  ideals  of  his  age,  Leo  was  the  most  prodigal 
of  spendthrifts.  Often  in  desperate  straits  for  the  ready  cash,  it 
was  only  too  convenient  for  him  to  realize  the  necessary  money 
by  the  sale  of  indulgences. 

24 


Friedrich,  surnamed  the  Wise,  Elector  of  Saxony,  was  a 
judicious  capable  ruler  and  pious  according  to  mediaeval  stand- 
ards. He  loved  peace,  order  and  justice.  This  moved  him  to 
protect  Luther,  though  he  otherwise  avoided  all  personal  con- 
tact with  the  Reformer.  The  Elector  was  the  most  powerful 
of  the  princes  of  the  Empire,  and  it  is  due  to  his  passive  aid,  his 
guarding  the  inviolability  of  Luther's  person,  rather  than  to 
any  public  assent  to  Luther's  work,  that  the  Reformation  was- 
so  successful  in  Germany.  This  noble-minded  prince  came  at 
the  close  of  his  life  to  a  fuller  insight  of  the  Gospel. 

25 


O    OS 

1  ^ 

M  « 

Eh 


.£  ^ 


26 


27 


il 

1 

OJ 

g 
0 

2 

0 

fee  ^ 

udy-room, 
ting  tal)le 
er  worked 
tit  of  time. 

and  rough  edges  are 
beginning  to  tell  the 
secret  of  its  great  age. 
The  large  iron   stove 
that  warmed  Luther's 
blood  can  yet  liold  the 
flames  of  many  fires; 

0 

-2 

03 

nd   there, 

the  sun- 

tne  planks 

le  floor  of 

02  o 

3g 

03 

11 

0  c 

p 

OD     .,     0     S 

OJ 

Tx) 
0 

2 

1 

0  y; ::::  Si 

28 


The  University  at  Wittenberg, 

Wittenberg,  the  electoral  residence,  was  selected  as  the 
site  of  the  university,  partly  because  the  income  of  the  Castle 
Church  could  be  used  for  its  support,  partly  because  there  was 
an  Augustinian  monastery  there,  which  could  be  relied  upon 
for  teachers  of  philosophy  and  theology.  ]\Iartin  Pollich,  Doc- 
tor of  Medicine,  Philosophy  and  Theology,  and  physician  to  the 
Elector,  and  Staupitz  were  the  Elector's  chief  advisers.  To 
promote  Friedrich's  plan,  they  called  to  Wittenberg  competent 
monks  from  other  cities  to  aid  in  the  work  of  instruction. 
Among  those  drafted  was  Martin  Luther. 
30 


"  Stadtkirche  "  IN  Wittenberg. 

By  urgent  request  of  the  town  council  of  Wittenberg, 
Luther,  in  1515,  accepted  the  charge  as  pastor  of  the  Town 
Church,  whose  pastor,  Simon  Heintz,  was  sickly  and  unable 
to  fulfill  his  many  duties.  This  edifice,  surmounted  by  double 
towers,  is  large  aiid  massive,  externally  plain  and  without 
any  architectural  pretension.  The  interior  is  commodious  and 
well  adapted  to  Protestant  worship. 


31 


Interior  of  the  Stadtkirche  in  Wittenberg. 

Notwithstanding  his  other  occupations,  Luther  found  time 
to  preach  constantly,  Bugenhagen  was  pastor  of  this  Stadt- 
kirche. When  in  1528  and  1529,  1530  and  1532,  and  again 
from  1537  to  1540  Bugenhagen  was  away  on  missionary  and 
other  duties,  Luther  preached  in  his  pulpit,  Sunday  after  Sun- 
day, frequently  also  on  Wednesdays  and  Saturdays. 

32 


Pulpit  in  the  Stadtkirche,  Wittenberg,  in  Luther's  Time. 


From  this  pulpit  Luther  preached  most  of  those  eloquent 
sermons  that  set  the  souls  of  his  hearers  aflame.  His  voice  was 
sonorous  and  far-reaching,  his  large  and  dark  eyes  seemed  to 
flash  fire  when  under  excitement,  and  when  reaching  a  climax 
he  bore  down  with  the  full  torrent  of  his  oratory.  While  in- 
describably powerful  his  preaching  was  always  reverent  and 
humble. 


Castle  Church  at  Wittenberg. 

To  tlie  door  of  this  Castle  Church  Luther  affixed  his  niuety- 
five  theses,  October  31,  1517.  The  wooden  doors  to  which  the 
theses  were  nailed  were  burned  in  1760,  during  the  war  with 
Austria,  but  in  1858  Emperor  Friedrich  Wilhelm  IV  replaced 
them  by  iron  doors,  bearino;  the  original  text  of  the  theses. 


34 


Interior  of  the  Castle  Church  in  Wittenberg. 


Monday,  February  22d,  the  Counts  of  Mansfeld  arrived 
with  Luther's  corpse  before  Wittenberg.  At  the  Elsterthor 
they  were  received  by  the  whole  University,  the  town  counselors 
and  citizens.  The  leaden  coffin  was  carried  into  this  Castle 
Church,  against  which  he  had  nailed  the  ninety-five  theses. 
Bugenhagen,  as  pastor  of  the  town  church,  delivered  a  sermon 
in  German  and  Melanchthon  followed  with  a  funeral  oration 
in  Latin  on  behalf  of  the  University.  The  body  was  then 
lowered  into  a  prepared  grave  near  the  pulpit. 

35 


Philip  Melanchthon. 


Melanehthon  had  entered  Heidelberg  University  at  the 
age  of  thirteen,  had  taken  the  degree  of  bachelor  at  fifteen  and 
of  master  one  year  later.  At  the  age  of  twenty-one  he  was 
called  to  the  University  of  Wittenberg  from  Tiibingen  to  be- 
come its  first  professor  of  Greek.  One  of  the  greatest  scholars 
and  teachers  of  the  century,  he  not  only  immensely  enhanced 
the  fame  of  the  university,  but  also  proved  himself  a  most  effi- 
cient aide  of  Luther. 

36 


I^'S^ 


^  ^  ^  s 


C_rJ    -^":5    ^    i.    ^'^-i    S 


>j  o   ,£5   s!   05   a; 


o3    •> 


'T3  ?» 

03    &C 


c5  5S 

o    >% 


o    o  —I 


'03         ^    p. 


^    'A 


0^   -rH      L^  ., 


2'^ 


03    ^ 


o  'bi 


^  ^  S 


37 


38 


idtr^i^ 


Nailing  the  Ninety-five  Theses  to  the  Church  Door. 

Instead  of  thundering  against  Tetzel  from  the  pulpit,  or 
publishing  a  polemic  pamphlet,  or  issuing  an  open  letter  to  the 
archbishop,  calling  liim  sliarply  to  account,  as  Luther  was 
quite  capable  of  doing,  he  invited  the  theologians  in  Wittenberg 
and  the  neighborhood  to  a  discussion.  Adopting  the  usual 
method  of  announcing  such  a  debate,  he  posted  a  notice  on  tht 
door  of  the  Castle  Church  stating  time  and  place  of  the  pro- 
posed disputation  and  the  theses  he  intended  to  defend. 
39 


Vera  Imago 
Theolckjia 


lOHANNI^    EcCII 

^Datati3 

XLIII 


EaCEIN  Gll055ERFElNDCHRI5nWAR 
HfjT^EHRVERFpLGT  DIEOHRISTLICH^OiWH 
Mil  JCHBElIfENVND  VNNVCZE^d^Cir*?^ 
»R^Hr  ERDtE  EINFELTICJEN  mSjti^C,Z 
;^rERia  VNI)  1K>  5  WAR  ALL  ^  Elljr    S I  INN 

vifeUr^EBS  iM-  (Jot  er  jst  xanq  hiinn 


JoHANN  EcK,  D.D.,  a  professor  of  the  University  of  Ingol- 
stadt,  was  like  Luther  a  peasant  by  extraction  and  a  monk  by 
profession,  a  theologian  of  no  mean  ability,  and  a  man  of  energy 
and  resource.  He  was,  without  doubt,  the  ablest  and  most  per- 
sistent opponent  Luther  ever  had.  In  Rome  he  painted  Lu- 
ther's "heresy"  in  such  black  colors  that  Leo  finally  decided 
that  there  was  nothing  left  but  to  condemn  Luther. 


40 


i 

H  3 

i 

1 

a 

4 

1=1 
o 

i 

2 

2 

3 
o 

1 

.2 
Id 

o 

1 

1 

o 

a; 
o 

o 

zn 

OS 

2 

03 
03 

a; 
1 

to 

% 
1 

'a 

o 

i 

3 

1 

•r-s 

o3 

B 
1 

03 

O 

S 

o 

o 

03 

-2 

o 

p 

OP 

o 

o    «s 
Mf2 

03    ^ 

O     -^ 
03    =: 

1 

% 

's 

i 

41 


Disputation  Between  Luther  and  Eck  in  Leipzig. 


The  debate  was  opened  with  much  pomp  and  solemnity  on 
the  twenty-seventh  of  June,  1519.  After  Karlstadt  had  de- 
bated until  the  fourth  of  July,  Luther  himself  took  the  floor. 
Though  very  careful  and  moderate  in  his  utterances,  he  yet 
maintained  that  the  authority  of  the  Pope  was  of  human  and 
not  of  divine  right,  and  that  a  Christian  might  therefore  be 
saved,  even  if  he  refused  to  submit  to  it.  This  the  sneering  Eck 
at  once  declared  sounded  like  the  opinion  of  Johann  Hus,  who 
had  been  condemned  by  the  Council  of  Constance  and  burned 
as  a  heretic  a  hundred  vears  before. 


42 


M      _(      r-*      ^  (-1       —  ' 


C3 


pJ 

5    Cq^ 


03^^  -^--B  2-^^  ^i^^"^-  «r' 


03  X2    Oj  .^    o 


43 


^  «H  ce  $ 


g^  aS  a:S 


P   2 


^f£ 


IS  -^ 

CM      ^ 


^>s 

H 

i 

s  ^  ? 

f.  ^ 

^ 

^   >   ti 

o    -S 

^ 

.^st 

r^ 

=+H 

o  ^ 

in       S 


O 


II 


Charles  V. 

The  election  of  Charles  of  Spain,  on  June  26,  1519,  had 
been  hailed  with  enthusiasm,  but  those  who  had  expected  much 
were  doomed  to  disappointment.  He  was  by  temperament  and 
training  far  more  Spanish  than  German.  Germany  was  hardly 
more  than  a  pawn  in  his  political  game.  When  he  needed  the 
support  of  the  Papacy  he  was  quite  willing  to  use  his  power  to 
suppress  Lutheranism,  and  though  a  devout  Catholic,  he  per- 
mitted it  to  flourish  when  he  wished  to  bring  the  Pope  to  terms. 


45 


S 

H 


a  ^ 


6.^  ^ 


t/2    si_i  'T2 

be   d  -3 

f1    P  o 

O     Jh     ;h 


r^      iZ      ^      '^ 


bX) 


r^  o;  ^o 


•73  '^    t3 


S      0; 


OJ     «J  OJ  CJ  0)  Ph 

^  -^  ^  ^  f»  2 

--^  4J  ^  03  r=< 

^  1  «  S  5  ^ 

"^  s  ^  .s  S  'S  t^ 


^    ^ 


'^     §    ^ 


fth^ 


be  oj    be  ^    3  ^ 
d     oj    j-H  j::^    ,    ~ 


The  Bishop's  Palace  in  Worms. 

On  April  17th,  the  day  after  his  arrival  in  Worms,  Luther 
was  cited  to  appear  before  the  Diet  that  afternoon  at  4  o'clock 
in  the  Bishop's  Palace,  where  the  Emperor  Charles  and  his 
brother  Ferdinand  were  staying.  This  Bishop's  Palace  was 
destroyed  by  the  French  in  1689  and,  after  being  rebuilt,  was 
again  destroyed  by  them  in  1794. 


48 


°5 

<p  o 


a>  -»J  a;  Ei  a;  a;  oi 


w  .     _   ^   _   a;  (D 

J    o  .  _  ,    , 

!  «^   o)  d   a  I— '  +j 


O  i-ci    JH 


^5   -M    03 

^  nd  '-^  S  ^  " 

;     >;j  03    y     03  r=:  SO 


^  'i'  oj  ;h  cLi  q-i 

1j  '-'  Oj  d  '^ 

o  ^^  o  a;  .5 

O  U 


°   fl   a3 
4-1 ,  .2 

I    §- 
fn     jj     cC 

s       <^ 

03    OJ^ 


p   d   WJ 

0;    S    ^ 
"^     CU    ^ 


?  c  c 

fl   22   " 
03    C    'i' 


49 


Luther  at  the  Entrance  of  the  Council  Hall. 

When  the  hour  had  arrived  in  which  this  faithful  witness 
of  Jesus  Christ  was  to  stand  before  the  great  and  mighty  of 
the  earth  to  make  a  good  profession,  the  valiant  and  famous 
general,  Georg  von  Frundsberg,  touched  him  on  the  shoulder 
and  said:  ''My  dear  monk,  thou  hast  to-day  a  march  and  a 
strtiggle  to'go  through,  such  as  neither  I  nor  other  great  cap- 
tains have  seen  in  our  most  bloody  battles ;  but  if  thy  cause  be 
just,  go  forward  in  God 's  name ;  he  will  not  forsake  thee. ' ' 


50 


a  =3 


pq  fH      ^  '^  cijD^H ' 


o    i^    ^    nS    .^-i-<    ^  _^ 


iJ   o 

2^ 

1 

M 

:i  > 

^.-2 

'c3 

«§• 

^ 

+^  'oj 

'^ 

^ 

ctf 

^Sr^ 

S 

o 

S    O 

^  a; 

-5 

ti  '^  o  a 


^  O)    ^-         -= 


O    C    " 

o 

73   -73 

r; 

Is 

a 

a  '^ 

s 

>    o 

Gj 

•^   o 

o 

ion 

less 
utt 

s 

go 

O 

^O 

o 

*s 

!^t» 

O/ 

T^   =4H 

o 

■S  ^^ 

c» 

«4-l 
O 

.5 

c^     ° 

rr-  . 

&  S-jS 

o 

M 

i» 

t* 

°    73 

0;  ' 

o 

'^   o 

-3 

.5 

^      S 
■|^ 

1 

H    O 


"     ii;     S  ^H     tn     S 

;3  a  cs  o  o  -Q 


S.ti  o 


Luther  Before  the  Diet  at  Worms. 

■  *  Since  his  Imperial  Majesty  requires  a  simple  and  straight 
answer,  I  will  give  him  one:  I  do  not  believe  in  either  the 
Pope  or  the  councils  alone,  since  it  is  certain  that  they  have 
often  erred  and  contradicted  themselves.  Unless  I  am  there- 
fore convinced  by  the  testimony  of  the  Scriptures,  or  by  clear 
and  forcible  reasons,  I  neither  can  nor  will  recant  a  single 
word. ' '  This  "  No  "  may  be  said  to  have  given  back  to  the  world 
a  Church  without  a  Pope  and  a  State  without  an  Inquisition. 

52 


The  Cathedral  at  "Worms. 


Of  all  the  buildings  which  existed  at  the  period  of  the 
Diet,  the  cathedral  alone  remains.  It  is  built  of  red  sandstone, 
Romanesque  in  style.  The  interior,  four  hundred  and  seventy 
feet  in  length,  lighted  through  stained  windows,  is  very  im- 
pressive. Services  were  conducted  in  this  spacious  church 
building  during  the  session  of  the  Diet.  Here,  on  May  26, 
1521,  after  divine  service,  Charles  V  signed  the  decree  which 
made  Luther  an  outlaw. 


53 


hl.iiM.J.^^^.j^^^' 


i — V 7 ~ 


Ir  \w,/c  v«^z'vi./j^.  .«^..^fcM^  -.frjt^j  ^,ji-\^]),ii  „.^  /;L^  ^ 


EiN  Feste  Burg  Tst  Unser  Gott. 

This  hymn,  "A  Mighty  Fortress  is  Our  God,"  is  Luther 
in  song.  Tt  is  pitched  in  the  very  key  of  the  man.  Rugged 
and  majestic,  trustful  of  God  and  confident,  it  was  the  defiant 
trumpet-blast  of  the  Reformation  speaking  out  to  the  powers, 
of  the  earth  and  under  the  earth  an  all-conquering  conviction 
of  divine  vocation  and  empowerment.  The  world  has  many 
songs  of  exquisite  tenderness  and  uncommon  trust,  but  this: 
one  is  matchless  in  its  warlike  tone,  its  rugged  strength  and 
its  inspiring  challenge, 


54 


Erasmus  of  Rotterdam. 


Erasmus  of  Rotterdam  was  a  scholar  of  great  talent,  with 
more  friends,  reputation  and  influence  than  any  other  private 
person  in  Europe.  Though  once  an  inmate  of  a  monastery,  he 
abhorred  the  monks  and  exposed  their  stupidity  and  vices  with 
terrible  severity.  His  opposition  to  the  scandalous  condition  of 
things  in  the  Roman  Church  was  sincere,  and  his  place  should 
have  been  at  Luther's  side  in  his  conflict  with  Rome.  But  the 
waters  were  too  deep  and  the  storms  too  fierce  for  the  waver- 
ing Erasmus. 


55 


W    H  Is) 


PQ 


05^    '-. 


ifi  r^    T3 


+j         f^    ro    Q    — 


^  ^  ^ 


S-f^ 


>  ^    ^    a    o 

2     !^  -^     .    '^ 


Sh     a;    *-i  "S    S 


0)    a> 

X      (D 


^     OJ     ™     ^^     5 


56 


pq  S 


The  "Wartburg. 


As  the  prophet  of  old  was  hid  in  a  cave  from  the  wrath 
of  Ahab,  so  Lutlier  was  conveyed  to  this  grim  fortress,  crown- 
ing the  wooded  heights  two  miles  to  the  south  of  the  town  of 
Eisenach.  The  building  is  neither  magnificent  nor  picturesque, 
but  it  exhibits  Romanesque  arcades  which  run  back  to  the 
twelfth  century.  In  this  stronghold  of  the  Elector,  Luther  was 
to  enjoy  a  safe  refuge  from  the  storms  that  were  now  to  break 
over  him. 


57 


43  >l      '     M 


-S^     05     ?i     ^ 


■^  -M  '^ 


r         ^         ^     ^         S     — H       +W 


'^       '   .       IT*. 


GO    ■^ 


^    ^^ 


Ji    i     =    ^  rr   >. 


^  i  ^  ^ 


X.  -^  J5  ^     r 


ii^^^ 


^'  :4  £:;  ■i^  73  ==  s 

-g  -^  S  3  o  .o 


S  o 


3^  ^ 


."^v,^^-W.  ■       -  : 

#] 

.1 

..J 

^^BK^-\=^^m>^^'Si 

J^ 

^s 

^  SS' 

^JMwaliMM 

>jj 

';^'^S.-.'. 

"^ 

^ 

^''  ''''''■'■■' 

^^Ite 

SPKs.      "^  - 

58 


H   -^     CU     2     S     Q 

>>-^    ;^  r7  ^    t!^    c3    2 


59 


Luther  as  Knight  George  at  The  Wartburg. 


The  identity  of  Luther  while  at  The  Wartburg  was  care- 
fully concealed.  He  allowed  his  hair  and  beard  to  grow,  put 
on  the  costume  of  a  knight,  wore  a  gold  chain,  carried  a  sword, 
and  engaged  occasionally  in  the  sports  and  occupations  of  a 
young  nobleman.  He  went  by  tlie  name  of  Junker  Jorg,  and 
was  supposed  to  be  a  knight  living  in  temporary  retirement. 
This  picture  of  Luther  was  painted  by  Cranach  during 
Luther's  secret  visit  to  Wittenberg  in  the  early  part  of  Decem- 
ber, 1521. 


60 


K.VTHARINA  VON   BORA. 

Katharina  von  Bora,  Luther's  wife,  was  the  daughter  of 
Hans  von  Bora  and  Katharina  von  Haugwitz,  who  died 
shortly  after  the  birth  of  her  daughter.  When  but  five  years 
of  age  her  father  married  again,  and  therefore  sent  little 
Katharina  to  the  convent  school  of  the  Benedictine  nuns  near 
Brehna,  Saxony.  AVhen  nine  years  old  she  was  set  apart  for 
the  religious  life  and  put  into  the  convent  at  Nimbschen.  She 
was  a  pious  woman,  a  vigorous  and  efficient  housewife,  and 
deeply  interested  in  her  husband's  work. 


61 


The  Betrothal  of  Luther  to  Katharina  von  Bora. 


On  a  certain  day  in  May  or  early  in  June,  1525,  Luther, 
accompanied  by  his  friend  Lucas  Cranach,  wended  his  way  to 
the  home  of  Philip  Reichenbach  and  made  to  Katharina  von 
Bora  the  proposition  of  marriage,  which  was  promptly  and 
joyfully  accepted.  It  is  this  scene  the  artist  Scheurenberg 
seeks  to  present  to  us  in  the  painting  reproduced  on  this  page. 


62 


f-l      O        <       C   r-T    fe 


^  ^  ^  a  a^  s  -^ 


S  5h^ 


«<^  o^  ^ 


73  O    S    f^  'Tj  ^ 

O)  ^  5:!   "  i:^   >; 

g  ^  5  m  §  g    .3 

o  ^  §  ^.g  g^^ 


pq  03 

O 


63 


Public  Celebration  op  Luther's  JMarriage. 


June  27th  was  appointed  as  the  day  for  the  formal  and 
public  celebration  of  Luther's  marriage.  On  the  appointed 
day,  a  service  was  held  in  the  Stadtkirche  and  a  wedding  feast 
given  at  Luther's  home.  A  large  circle  of  guests  were  present 
at  that  eventful  ceremony ;  among  these  was  Leonhard  von 
Koppe,  who  had  assisted  Katharina  in  her  escape  from  the 
convent.  Wedding  presents  were  sent  by  the  University,  the 
Elector,  Cranach,  and  also  from  the  Archbishop  Albrecht  of 
Mainz,  who  had  been  the  frequent  object  of  many  of  Luther's 
most  merciless  attacks. 


64 


Elector  Johann,  Surnamed  The  Constant. 

The  Elector  Friedrich  was  succeeded  by  his  brother 
Johann.  Except  on  rare  occasions  the  Elector  Friedrich  took 
no  active  part  in  the  work  of  the  Reformation,  but  with  the 
accession  of  his  brother  the  period  of  hesitation  was  over. 
Johann  M^as  devoted  heart  and  soul  to  Luther's  cause  and  was 
glad  to  let  it  be  known.  He  died  August  16,  1532,  and  was 
buried  in  the  Castle  Church  at  Wittenberg,  Luther  officiating. 

65 


s 

B-^ 

"^ 

o    ^ 

c^ 

1 

03 

s 

s 

1 

1 

^ 

S 

1" 

03 

3 

5 

a 

l| 

M 

2   S 
.25  =S 

1 

(D 

s 

^ 

^ 

1 

OJ 

=4H 
O 

1 

g 

« 
S 

0; 
O 

■t; 

xn 

3 

1 

J5C 

Oh    ° 

s 

xn 

2 

O 

1 

1 

1 

a; 

Ph 

m 

fin 

t 

be 

1 

1 
i 

O 

o 

•r-s 
O 

1 

O 

S 

o 

>. 

66 


Luther  and  His  Children. 

Besides  his  own  children,  Luther  and  his  wife  brought  up 
no  less  than  eleven  of  his  orphaned  nephews  and  nieces.  This 
reprimander  of  Popes  and  Kings  was  loved  by  the  children, 
and  the  great  champion  was  as  playful  among  them  as  though 
he  were  himself  again  a  child.  He  could  fight  fiercely  all  day 
for  his  cause  and  in  the  evening  take  his  lute,  gaze  at  the  stars, 
sing  psalms  and  muse  upon  the  clouds,  the  fields,  the  flowers, 
the  birds,  dissolved  in  melody  and  devotion. 


67 


jMagdalena  Luther. 

Magdalena  Luther  was  a  child  of  singular  depth  of  char- 
acter, amiable,  affectionate  and  deeply  religious.  Without  the 
ordinary  failings  of  children,  her  father  testifies  that  she  had 
never  done  an  act  reqidring  parental  reproof.  A  profound 
impression  was  made  upon  all  of  Luther's  acquaintances  as 
they  saw  or  heard  of  a  man  of  such  rugged  strength  overcome 
with  emotion  by  the  side  of  his  dying  child.  At  the  age  of 
thirteen  she  fell  asleep  in  her  father's  arms. 


68 


The   Peasants'   War. 

The  most  disastrous  blow  to  Luther  and  his  work  was  the 
Peasants'  War,  Luther  was  neither  responsible  for  it,  nor 
did  it  begin  among  his  disciples.  It  was  only  a  repetition,  on  a 
larger  scale,  of  many  similar  attempts  of  former  years,  and 
the  interests  underlying  all  of  them  were  not  religious,  but 
economic.  These  and  a  misinterpretation  of  certain  of  Luther 's 
utterances  precipitated  and  gave  impetus  to  the  revolt.  Never 
found  wanting  in  the  hour  of  danger.  Luther  sought  by  every 
means  in  his  power  to  make  the  princes  and  lords  see  their 
wrong  policy  toward  these  unfortunates,  and  when  this  was 
of  no  avail  he  tried  to  persuade  the  peasants  to  peace.  Had 
Luther's  advice  been  followed  at  the  outset,  much  bloodshed 
would  have  been  avoided  and  many  of  the  demands  of  the 
peasants  would  have  been  granted. 


69 


Luther  Translating  the  Old  Testament, 

The  warm  rt^ception  given  the  translation  of  the  New 
Testament  induced  Luther  to  continue  his  translation  of  the 
Old  Testament.  In  this  work  he  gladly  availed  himself  of  the 
learning  of  Aurogallus,  the  Professor  of  Hebrew  at  Witten- 
berg, and  of  Melanchthon,  Other  Wittenberg  professors  and 
pastors  were  called  in  for  consultation,  among  whom  were 
Ziegler,  Rorer,  Jonas,  Bugenhagen  and  Forster.  For  a  time 
a  weekly  "Collegium"  was  held,  beginning  a  few  hours  before 
supper,  in  which  the  various  texts  and  translations  were  faith- 
fully compared. 


70 


Arrival  op  Luther  and  His  Colaborers  at  Marburg. 

Luther  expected  little  good  from  the  conference  which 
Philip  of  Hesse  had  arranged  between  Zwingli  and  himself, 
and  frankly  informed  the  Landgraf  of  his  attitude.  He  finally 
yielded,  however,  and  promised  to  be  present.  Zwingli,  with 
CEcolampadius,  Bucer,  Hedio  and  others,  arrived  September 
27,  1529.  Three  days  later  came  Luther,  accompanied  by 
Melanchthon,  Jonas,  Cruciger,  Myconius,  Brenz,  Osiander, 
Stephan  Agricola  and  others.  The  tireless  Landgraf  provided 
accommodations  for  all  in  his  castle  and  entertained  them  in 
truly  royal  fashion. 


71 


n 

I! 

3^ 

o 

o  "^ 

r 

i 

lli 

.::5    o 

o 

o 

a 

s 

O 

S 

si 

r/3       S 

r— 1  r:^ 
7^    o 

J3 

o 

s 

o 

o 

1 

1  ^  i 

■^    S    O 

N    <t^    ^ 

^     M      1; 
■^    <I1    ^ 

S          •       g] 

ii 

o 
fee 

s 
i 

o 

ll 

72 


o 

%  < 


1 1:  ^  I  5  §  i^  ?r  1^ 

"     -'   -^    =5    -     ■-  —  &c 


-u     jj      Oj      :_,      hr  TV     '^ 


ta^ 


^    ^ 


02    ."       ^ 


■73    ^ 


03    '73 


S  ^  ;^  N 


O  CO  g  ^fT'  rt  o  '^  -  ^        '- 


an  ^ 


=;^ 


^J^ 


^1- 


i  o 


^^  ;S 


>  o  a.  o  S:^   =! 


C^  +-  r'  ^-5    CJ 


74 


Martin  Luther. 


Looked  at  in  the  flesh,  perhaps,  no  one  would  have  thought 
of  Luther  as  the  chosen  instrument  of  God  to  grapple  with  the 
magnitudinous  tyranny  by  which  Europe  was  enthralled. 
Rome  has  never  forgotten  nor  forgiven  him.  Profited  by  his 
labors  beyond  what  she  ever  could  have  been  without  him,  she 
still  curses  his  name  and  everything  that  savors  of  him.  Oft- 
answered  and  exploded  calumnies  are  revived  afresh  to  throw 
dishonor  on  his  cause. 

75 


SCHMALKALDEN. 


During  the  Christmas  season  of  1580,  the  Protestant 
princes  and  the  representatives  of  a  number  of  free  cities  met 
in  this  building  in  the  little  town  of  Schmalkalden,  to  form  a 
defensive  league  for  mutual  protection  against  the  Emperor 
and  the  Catholic  princes.  This  League  of  Schmalkalden  laid 
the  political  foundations  of  religious  liberty  for  our  modern 
world.  Luther  was  the  first  effectively  to  assert  the  principle 
of  the  independence  of  the  State  from  ecclesiastical  control. 


76 


JOHANN   FrIEDRICH,   ELECTOR  OF   SaXONY. 


Johann  Friedrieh,  who  succeetled  his  father,  John  the 
Constant,  had  been  brought  up  in  a  strongly  Lutheran  atmo- 
sphere by  Spalatin.  He  was  an  even  more  ardent  disciple  of 
the  Reformer  than  his  father,  and  for  his  unflinching  courage 
in  confessing  the  faith  in  peril  of  his  life  deserves  to  be  honored 
as  one  of  the  greatest  heroes  of  the  Reformation.  His  wife, 
Sj'billa,  also  took  an  active  interest  in  everything  pertaining 
to  Luther's  cause. 


77 


rifft  ©cuofcf).  pi 

mm,  eutt).  K^'^^ 

©ittcmbcrg, 
53cgnaOrtmitSu^  ; 

furfthcbersu  Saclpren  ^  ^ 
freifcit. 

".  l6ct>rucktt)urct>IDan9Xufft.  v  " 


J».  0.  XXXIIII, 


First  Edition  of  Luther's  Translation  of  the  Complete 
Bible,  1534. 

The  importance  for  the  whole  of  Christendom  of  Luther's 
translation  of  the  Bible  can  hardly  be  overestimated.  The 
German  people  received  in  it  a  treasure  which  enriched  them 
for  all  time.  Their  language,  their  literature,  their  thought, 
their  life,  their  schools,  and  above  all,  their  souls  were  enriched 
thereby.  Luther's  version  has  won  the  highest  praise.  Idio- 
matic, vital  in  every  part,  clothed  in  the  racy  language  of 
common  life,  it  created,  apart  from  its  religious  influence,  an 
epoch  in  the  literary  development  of  the  German  nation. 


78 


The  Castle  in  "Wittenberg. 

Friedrich,  surnamed  the  Wise,  who  became  Elector  of 
Saxony  in  1486,  usually  resided  at  Altenburg,  in  the  southern 
part  of  his  territory,  but  built  this  castle  at  Wittenberg  in 
order  to  have  a  residence  for  his  northern  dominions  also.  At 
this  castle  occurred  the  famous  meeting  of  Luther  and  the 
papal  legate.  Cardinal  Vergerio,  who  had  come  to  "that  sink 
of  heresy"  (Wittenberg)  in  November,  1535,  and  invited  the 
banned  and  outlawed  heretic  Luther  to  breakfast  with  him.  He 
referred  to  Luther  as  a  "beast"  in  his  report  to  Rome,  but 
later  in  life  the  study  of  the  writings-of  the  ' '  beast ' '  made  him 
a  heretic  in  the  eyes  of  his  Church,  He  died  in  Tiibingen,  active 
to  the  last  as  a  publicist  against  the  Papacy, 


79 


w    ^   2 

3  ^ 


^H 

1 

1 

1 

I 

E 

9^ 

1 

1 

vvoul 
him 
ever 

Sa^^BH 

__    a 

^^Eb 

8 

1 

1 

I 

i 

k  ^ 

■ 

^  3  '^ 

^^^s 

'" 

g 

B 

B 

1 

I 

1 

^ 

■I^l 

■ 

1^  ^1 

■B 

Bi36.i»J^ 

" — •*••-= 

1  ^-^ 

e  brother  counts 
[ansfeld,   Albert 
Gerhard,    had 

^05 

1 

cd 

•S 

1 

T3 
O 

.2  ^ 

w 

o 

1 

is 

=  1 

o      ^ 

05 

—  ^ 
•Si 

him,  promising 
d  of  peace,  taki 
Qtiment  that  she 

o    a 

o 

0) 
Oh 

o 

.5  o 

o 

80 


3  o^.-^^ 


05       ■     ^     M     rH 


C3   oj 

'"I 

o     - 


fl  a  5 


^  s  S 


03 


81 


^    o 

^    a; 
o  '^ 


II 


o    a> 


EH 

o     . 

O     M 
CO     H 

H     W 
Eh 


O 


^  Ph  'w 

rt    ^   ^  ^ 
a    o 
5  ^ 


S    o 


O      O      d        ' 


£  -?.  S 


c  .a  ►-D  13 


s  P^  ?  P^ 

S  s  ^  " 


w 


3 

■-3     C 


^  ^ 


'TZ!      E      0; 


tc 


03   :o   '^ 

go  I 


^^^^:S^cc   ^ 


o 

(M     O 


82 


ft 


«|1 

'^   o   3 
o    --^ 


3       f^       Kn    -^       fcr     fK       O 


C       O         .      -M 


s 
■I  :  o 


■?  'Si  P^  -S 


§  ^  I  j  i 


■^   5 


u  'S  -s   5 


';^    '^  •'^  §  .2  2  ^ 

1^  g  fl  °  >;  a 

^  -^  ^  -  a  ^  I 

-     tn  SM  '^  --^  "^  2 


as- 


^^    'TT      O 


6  'is  .o 


a;  ^ 

3  ^  ^  ^  >  u 

2     S      t>  O)  S  03    T3 

ft     ^      a;  t-  0)  |i      in 

d    o   '13  ft  tH  ^    o 


83 


INDEX 


Absolution,  75. 

Abuse  of  Luther,  21,  223. 

Address  to  the  Nobility,  112,  114, 

117,  263,  313. 
Ailly,  Pierre  d',  71,  73,  87,  180. 
A  Mighty  Fortress,  37. 
Amsdorf,  159,  168,  222. 
Anabaptists,    17,    34,    229,    267, 

307,  318.      (See  Munzer.) 
Angels,  259. 
Apocalypse  of  St.  John,  267,  268, 

272. 
Aristotle,  45,  49,  88,  181. 
Asceticism,  279,  292.     (See  Mo- 

nasticism.) 
Augsburg,  114,  130,  138,  220. 
Augsburg,  Diet  of,  229. 
Augustine,  37,  49,  63,  82,  86,  90, 

106,   110,   180,  210,   225,   249, 

315. 
Augustinians,  53,  57,  70,  75,  100, 

136,  142,  155,  163,  166,  171. 
Aurifaber,  37,  190. 
Autobiography  of  Luther,  59. 

Babylonian  Captivity,  227,  283. 

Ban,  159,  170. 

Barge,  20,  26,  147. 

Bernard  of  Clairvaux,  73,  79,  86, 

95,  107,  244. 
Bible,    Interpretation,    46,    182, 

249,  265,  291,  303. 
Bible,  "Modern"  Theologians  of 

the  Middle  Ages  and,  93. 
Bible,  Source  of  Doctrine,  93. 
Biel,  71,  79,  91,  101,  107,  180. 
Bigamy  in  General,  227,  241. 
Bigamy  of  Philip  of  Hesse,  227. 
Bismarck,  20,  69,  244,  268. 
Black  Cloister,  53,  63,  65,  82, 156, 


163,   165,  180,  193,  213,  221, 

244. 
Blasphemy,  258,  305,  310. 
Bonaventura,  73,  74,  102. 
Brant,  267,  273. 
Bull    of    Excommunication,    12, 

141. 

Cajetan,  114,  129,  135,  138,  144, 

229,  237. 
Calvin,  42,  151,  184,  244,  252. 
Canon  Law,  50,  127,  181. 
Catharine  von  Bora,  22,  188,  190, 

199,  205,  211,  218,  244,  258. 
Catholic  Background  of  Luther, 

236,  242,  253,  282,  298,  316. 
Catholic  Biographies  of  Luther, 

21. 
Catholic  Hierarchy,  92,  286. 
Catholic  Piety,  276. 
Catholic    Reformation,   23,    270, 

285. 
Catholic  Religion  in  Middle  Ages, 

89,  270,  276,  292. 
Celibacy,  152,  166,  273. 
Charles  the  Fifth,  118,  138,  140, 

201,  206. 
Church  a  Missionary  Institution, 

295. 
Church  and  State,  88,  92,  167, 

173,  261,  294,  305. 
Church  of  England,  314,  317. 
Cochlaeus,  21,  34,  39n,  55,  196, 

223,  229. 
Colet,  264,  269. 
Confessional,  88,  153. 
Confessional  Advice,  235. 
Confessional,     Inviolability     of, 

238. 
Congregation,  ^96,  314. 


85 


86 


INDEX 


Councils,  58,  92,  94, 114, 117, 142. 
Cranach,   Lucas,   2-6,   194,   201, 

217. 
Crotus  Rubeanus,  86,  112,  115, 

197. 

Denifle,  25,  27,   33,  67,   70,   82, 

86,  176,  208,  215,  223. 
Development  of  Luther,  253. 
Doellinger,  24,  25. 
Dominicans,  135,  143. 
Duns  Skotus,  90,  180,  285,  287. 
Diirer,  Albrecht,  5,  6,  9, 185,  196. 

Eck,  34,  93,  121,  142,  197,  207, 

257. 
Education,  304,  312. 
Eisenach,  36,  169,  239. 
Eisleben,  36,  66. 
Election  of  Emperor,  140. 
Elector  Frederick  the  Wise,  51, 

113,   118,   136,   138,   147,   157, 

200. 
Elector    John     Frederick,    199, 

207,  231,  236. 
Emser,  34,  197. 
Erasmus,  11,  17,  23,  34,  117, 180, 

196,  264,  269. 
Erfurt,  36,  58,  67,  121. 
Eucharist.     (See  Mass.) 

Faith,  83,  280. 
Fasting,  50,  153. 
Franck,  34,  36,  246,  251. 
Frankfurt  Anonymous,  86,  102. 
Frederick  the  Great,  11,  15. 
Freedom  of  Conscience,  11,  13, 

310. 
Freedom  of  Teaching,  306. 
Fugger,  130. 

Gerson,  71,  73,  102,  180. 
Goethe,  14,  68,  69,  258. 
Good  Works,  77,  92,  99. 
Grace,  74,  77,  89,  98,  109,  284. 
Grisar,  24,  25,  52,  60,  82,  261. 


Hans  Luther,  65,  102,  204,  208, 

255. 
Harnack,  17,  254. 
Hebrew,  46,  53,  181. 
Heritage  of  the  Home,  255. 
History  and   Historical   Method, 

8,  9,   16,  21,   25,   29,   31,   179, 

185,  274,  291. 
Holbein,  5,  6.     (See  Portraits  of 

Luther.) 
Humanists  and   Humanism,  18, 

35,  46,  86,  112,  114,  180,  194, 

229,  259,  264,  270. 
Hussites,  14,  117,  263,  267,  303. 
Hutten,  86,  112,  114,  151. 

Iconoclasm,  147,  152,  163,  168, 
174.  (See  Wittenberg  Un- 
rest.) 

Illness  of  Luther,  24,  42,  65,  68, 
80,  203,  209,  214. 

Inconsistencies  of   Luther,   250. 

Indulgences,  50,  56,  113, 120, 127, 
139. 

Inquisition,  305. 

Italians,  113. 

Janssen,  24,  31,  86,  176. 
Joachim    of   Brandenburg,    132, 

257. 
Jubilee,  125,  126,  129. 
Jurists,  50,  88,  197,  199. 
Justification,  11,  90,  99,  249,  281. 

Kant,  226. 

Karlstadt,  17,  20,  21,  34,  86,  147, 

152,  164,  171,  196,  246. 
Kulturstaat,  304. 

Lefevre,  180,  264,  269. 

Leipzig  Disputation,  41,  61,  140, 

199,  205. 
Letters  of  the  Obscure  Men,  112. 
Liberalism,  15,  16. 
Literature  about  Luther,  7-9,  27, 

(See  Writers  on  Luther.) 


INDEX 


87 


Literary  Habits  of  Luther's  Age, 
141,  195,  201.    (See  Luther  as 

an  Author.) 
Loyola,  31,  42, 102, 110,  271. 
Lutheranism,  10,  13,  16,  28,  35, 

276,  300. 
Luther  and  Art,  185. 
Luther  the  Author,  42,  177,  183, 

189,     208,     251,     247.       (See 

Luther  as  Controversialist.) 
Luther  the  Barbarian,  184. 
Luther,  Birth  of,  65. 
Luther,  Books  of,  44,  45,  63,  82, 

95,  104. 
Luther  and  the  Catholic  Church, 

51,  53,  57. 
Luther,  Childhood  of,  69. 
Luther,  Child  of  the  Time,  254. 
Luther  the  Choleric,  199,  201. 
Luther  and  the  Church  Fathers, 

180,  225. 
Luther  the  Controversialist,  197, 

251. 
Luther  the  Critic,  49,  53,  58,  103, 

113,  182. 
Luther  on  Dancing,  12. 
Luther,  his  Death,  5,  37-39. 
Luther  and  the  Devil,  256. 
Luther  and  Drink  Question,  12, 

41,  154,  160,  162,  206,  304. 
Luther,  Evangelical  View  of,  9, 

20,  31. 
Luther,  Finds  Relative  to,  36,  39, 

43. 
Luther  and  Forgery,  223. 
Luther  the  Glutton,  205,  211. 
Luther,  Guides  of,  86,  93,  107, 

112. 
Luther  a  Hypochondriac,  65. 
Luther,  Influence  of,  318. 
Luther,  Insanity  of,  24,  80. 
Luther,  Lectures  of,  37,  44,  51, 

54,  58,  61,  63,  82,  87,  96,  103. 
Luther  as  a  Liar,  65,  66,  82,  88, 

177,  225. 


Luther  as   a  Linguist,  47,   118, 

179,  181,  185. 
Luther  the  Monk,  18,  44,  51,  58, 

65,  67,  84. 
Luther,  Morality  of,  223. 
Luther  and  Music,  185. 
Luther  the  Nationalist,  15,  87, 

111,  117. 
Luther  and  Nature,  187. 
Luther,  Open  and  Frank  Char- 
acter of,  42,  50,  60,  67,  113. 
Luther    as    an    Organizer,    151, 

184,  247. 
Luther,  Originality  of,  254,  263, 

274. 
Luther    the    Peasant,    1,    2,    18, 

(See  Heritage  of  the  Home.) 
Luther,  Personal  Character  of, 

7-9,  11-13,  25,  177,  205,  242. 
Luther  the  Poet,  185. 
Luther,  Political  Activity  of,  242. 
Luther,  Portraits  of,  1-9,  18,  67. 
Luther,  Precursors  of,  86.     (See 

Guides  of  Luther.) 
Luther   and   Predestination,   78, 

101. 
Luther  as  Priest,  54,  65,  71. 
Luther  and  Problems  of  the  Day, 

42,  49,  59,  113,  117,  120,  149, 

183. 
Luther    the    Professor    and 

Teacher,  181. 
Luther  the  Prophet,   9,   10,  17, 

111,  255. 
Luther  the  Scholar,  44,  52,  58, 

63,  72,  83,  111,  177,  182. 
Luther,  Sermons  of,  44,  58. 
Luther,   Sources  Relative  to,  8, 

25,  27,  32,  41,  69. 
Luther  on  the  Theater,  12. 
Luther,  Theology  of,  89. 
Luther  as  Translator,  213. 
Luther,  Trial  of,  135,  142. 
Luther,     Views     on     Economic 

Questions,  262. 


88 


INDEX 


Manual  Labor,  Praise  of,  266. 
Margaret  Luther,  21,  66,  256. 
Marriage,  1,  205,  216,  220,  230, 

267,  301. 
Marsilio  Ficino,  47,  264,  269. 
Mass,    150,    160,    166,    168,    279, 

298.     (See  also  Sacraments.) 
Mathesius,  9,  190,  192,  194,  207. 
Mayence,  Albrecht  of,  131,  215. 
Mayence  Indulgence,  131. 
Mediaeval  Background  of  Luther, 

18,  35,  39,  46,  87,  98,  107,  109. 
Melanchthon,  4,  6,  64,  115,  155, 

157,    161,   164,   168,    181,   184, 

199,   206,   211,   217,  229,  235, 

244,  249,  260,  310. 
Miltiz,  61, 139. 
Miners,  208,  255. 
Modern  Pro  testantism  and 

Luther,  317. 
"Modern"    Theologians,    89,    93, 

107,  240,  248. 
Monasticisni,  51,  58,  66,  80,  112, 

266,  271,  280,  297.     (See  As- 
ceticism.) 
Monastic  Vows,  154,  163,  224. 
Morality  of   Middle   Ages,   215, 

304. 
Mosellan,  4,  199. 
Munzer,  20,  24,  34,  246,  307. 

(See  Anabaptists.) 
Mysticism,   19,   35,  86,  95,  102, 

109,  287. 
Mythology,   New,   30,   254,   274. 

(See  Personality  in  History.) 

Natural  Law,  88, 149,  261,  302. 
Neoplatonism,  96,  107,  274,  277, 

280. 
Nietzsche,  18. 

Okkam  and  Okkamism,  71,  73, 
81,  84,  86,  94,  101,  107,  149, 
180,  185,  240,  248,  259,  285. 

Okkam's  Conceot  of  God.  76.  90. 


Okkam  on  Revelation,  88. 
Organization  of  the  Church,  294, 
314. 

Peasant  Revolt,  17,  21, 175. 
Penance,  91,  99,  124. 
Personality  in  History,  268,  316. 
Peter  Lombard,  46,  48,  63,  180. 
Philip  of  Hease,  227,  231. 
Pietism,  10,  21,  28,  35. 
Popes,  51,  124,  125,  126,  127,  128, 

130,  140,  194,  202,  237,  294. 
Precursors  of  Luther,  263,  273, 

286,  303. 
Prierias,  93,  113,  137,  193,  201. 
Princes,  12,  50,  114,  201,  207. 
Psychological  Interpretation,  13, 

30,  53,  60,  65,  82,  177,  203. 
Purgatory,  75,  124. 
Puritanism,  173. 

Quakers,  35,  317. 

Ranke,  Leopold  von,  31,  35. 

Rationalism,  11-19,  23,  29,  30,  88, 
96. 

Rebellion,  Right  of,  148. 

Reform  Through  Education,  149, 
171. 

Reform  by  Force,  149,  159,  171, 
201. 

Relics,  56. 

Religion,  Luther's  Views  on,  278, 
291. 

Renaissance,  281.  (See  Hu- 
manism.) 

Revelation,  291. 

Romanticists,  13-19.  23,  30. 

Rome,  53,  56,  114,  186,  201. 

Sacraments,  77,  87,  91,  282. 
Saint  Paul,  23,  38,  47,  61,  106, 

109,  111,  244,  264. 
Saint  Worship,  50,  113. 
Savonarola,  144,  244,  274. 


INDEX 


89 


Saxony,  58,  132,  134,  174. 

Schleiermacher,  14,  36. 

Scholasticism,  34,  48,  50,  72,  84, 
120,  135,  179,  250,  287. 

Schwenckfeld,  21,  34,  36,  197, 
246. 

Secularization  of  Church  Prop- 
erty, 165,  172. 

Sickingen,  Franz  von,  112,  115. 

Sin,  11,  75,  80,  89,  98,  101. 

Social  Democracy,  20,  21. 

Spalatin,  159,  170,  200,  216,  221. 

State,  88,  149,  153,  173,  299. 

Staupitz,  45,  53,  80,  86,  99,  107, 
136,  142. 

Superstition,  255. 

Table  Talk,  42,  189. 
Tauler,  86,  102,  281. 
Tetzel,  34, 120,  129, 135, 144. 
Theses,  Ninety-five,  61,  99,  104, 

119,  121,  129,  134,  143. 
Theses,  Ninety-seven,  120. 
Thomas  Aquinas,  137,  179,  287. 
Treasury  of  Merits,  128.     (See 

Good  Works.) 
Troeltsch,  17,  255,  282. 

Veracity  of  God,  248. 
Views  on  Luther,  7-10, 16. 
Vocation,  Secular,  280. 


Waldenses,  35,  263. 

Wartburg,  6,  148,  159,  169,  205, 

224. 
White  Lie,  88,  225,  240. 
Wiclif,  86,  263,  303. 
Will,  73,  83,  90,  109. 
Witches,  256. 
Wittenberg,  10,   34,  48,  58,  83, 

120,  174. 
Wittenberg,   Charter   of,    152. 
Wittenberg,  Morals  Police,  172, 

304. 
Wittenberg,  Poor  Laws,  152, 154, 

157,  165,  172,  304. 
Wittenberg,  University  of,  156, 

161,  166,  195,  309. 
Wittenberg,  Unrest  in,  146,  152, 

154,  164,  173. 
Worms,  21,  37,  62,  145,  200. 
Writers  on   Luther,   10,   12,   15, 

17,  18,  23,  25,  33,  34,  39,  40, 

44,  46,  82,  86,  103,  110,  122, 

138,   144,   151,    155,   161,   168, 

178,   179,   190,   192,   195,  200, 

201. 


Zwickau    Prophets,    162.       (See 

Anabaptists.) 
Zwilling,  155,  162,  168,  171,  174. 
Zwingli,  17,  197,  246,  270. 


BW2227  .B673 

Luther  in  light  of  recent  research, 

Princeton  Theological  Semmary-Speer  Library 


1    1012  00016  8395 


DATE  DUE 

m  ^ 

WIf 

HIGHSMI" 

FH  #45115 

